CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Stimulating Participation

To: "Warren C. Stankiewicz" <nf1j@earthlink.net>,<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Stimulating Participation
From: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:44:07 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
At 12:41 PM 11/30/2004, Warren C. Stankiewicz wrote:
I've got to disagree with Hans on this one. The only measurable metric on
activity is how many logs are submitted. Anything else ("...gee, there were
a lot of signals on the bands...") is heresay, unmeasurable, and not
quantifiable.

We need solutions which can prove quantifiable results, and a plan which
will produce those results. Otherwise, there's no real point to sponsoship
at all, considering the data the ARRL has showing us to be a tiny minority
of the ham population at large.

Arguments such as we spend more on our stations, have greater equity and
interest in the hobby, are advancing the state of the art, etc, have no
pursuasive value without concrete, verifiable statistics to back them up.


Contest sponsors have the means at hand to track raw activity. The log-checking software can produce lists of call-signs appearing in anyone's log, and even allowing for a fair number of busts, a consistent metric could be developed (assuming that the percentage of busts didn't change appreciably over time). This could even be cleaned up by cross-checking with databases to get rid of the bad calls, sorted by country (to produce information on national or continental trends of activity), etc. There's a lot of very interesting and relevant information out there for the massaging.

73, Pete N4ZR


_______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>