----- Original Message -----
From: <K3BU@aol.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] I can feel the heat! Fwoosh!
>
> In a message dated 4/3/2001 09:45:28 Eastern Daylight Time, aa4lr@arrl.net
> writes:
>
> >
> > Outlaw packet, and a lot of these guys won't get on the air during a
> > contest. It isn't so much about score, but fun. Casually operating a
> > contest with packet assistance is fun. At least, for some it is.
> >
>
> To me it is the same "fun" as walking into the ZOO and casually shooting
few
> animals here and there, which otherwise they wouldn't be able to shoot.
Too
> much trouble of finding and cornering the prey (rare DX) ?
Do you call making several thousand contacts in a contest looking for and
finding rare DX?
>
> I don't want to get into the reasons of pro and con here, but it looks
like
> gradual reliance on "crutches" (easier, more comfortable "hunting") is
> getting us to the point where it is getting ridiculous. First it was nets,
> lists, last two, repeaters, then packet. If someone put outboard engine on
a
> sail boat (in sailboat races) that would be a no-no. Yet when we want to
> preserve single operator categories (without assistance by other operators
> via anything) we scream for "deregulation," "everybody is doing it,"
"let's
> have a fun." What happened to pleasure of hunting and demonstrating own
> skills? Would you want someone else to have a sex "for you"?
Let's go back to the good old days with a transmitter and seperate receiver
all tube rigs of course and paper logs, the winner will be the one who's log
doesn't have any miswritten callsigns.
>
> It is not anymore who is the most skilled station builder and operator,
but
> who is more "clever" on soliciting contacts by other "gray" means.
There's nothing gray about packet networks. They tell you where someone else
says he heard another operator. Simple
>
> Let me ask some DXers on the Honor Roll: How does it feel if you worked
> majority of your new ones by scooping them off the packet and "making the
> call"? Does it feel like being good hunter, or the one who "killed" most
of
> his DX prey in the biggest ZOO?
DX'ers from now on must qualify how they got the information? Is it OK if
they received the information snail mail from one of the publications? That
to is using assistance isn't it?
>
> The point is, if we have a competition that is supposed to demonstrate and
> measure our skills, has a rules, why not obey those rules and have a real
> fun. If there is a such cry for packet assisted contest, lets have one and
> all those lazy "hunters" can go and have a "fun" there.
That is exactly where we are. Welcome to the year 2001. Where modern
technology (most of invented by hams) allows competitors to legally /
ethically and within the rules use packet assistance to improve their
scores. While others who choose not to use packet can enjoy their form of
competition. And for all the competition if you WIN........................
you get a piece of paper or a piece of wood with your name on it. Not $1
million dollars, a certificate or plaque in the SPIRIT of AMATEUR
Radiosport.
>
> I envy those guys who have a friend, who "without asking" will go and spot
> his contesting friend about 50 times during the contest (pileup dies off,
put
> the spot out), while I was spotted only once by some UA6. Or those who sit
on
> their "own" run frequency whole contest, only to jump over to work the new
> one delivered by packet assisted army of spotters.
> And I am not talking about other "clever" uses of packet. Some fair play?
> I think it is time to have a look at some top scoring logs and correlate
with
> packet spots and see who is really unassisted.
>
> World would not cave in if during the contest we had all packet networks
> display message:
>
> "Closed for contest weekend, go and have fun doing your own hunting, good
> luck!"
>
> I guess it would make too much sense. I hope many will wake up and realize
> the situation before is too late.
>
> 73 Yuri, K3BU
> Tesla RC N2EE, NT1E
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|