[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Category Identity

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Category Identity
From: "Tod -ID" <tod@k0to.us>
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 17:13:37 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Thinking about the matter of SO2R, Skimmering, and whatever else comes next
in the context of how the entries might line up when reported, I think that
I personally can tolerate whatever the rule committees [poor devils] finally
decide to do with respect to entry classifications. 

Most folks are inclined to look at where they stand in the listings on
several bases; in the total aggregate, in their own call area or division,
in their own section/state; in their own power category, etc. If nothing
else, I would like to see the rules committees require that SO2R users and
skimmer users include identification of that use with their submittal. Then,
if those data are included in the listings, it will possible to compare your
score to those who are using/not using SO2R etc. Further, if you have not
yet tried the SO2R challenge, being aware of the difference provided by that
bit of skill/technology might help you decide to try it [or not] next time.
The same probably will be true for Skimmer use. 

I don't really care if every single op is lumped together in one category as
long as enough information about their operation is provided so I can
separate the individual ops and associate their scores with the 'assistance
or non-assistance' they chose to use. Obviously there will be some
confounding due to operator skill but in the long run that parameter will
become known too.

Tod, K0TO

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] Category Identity, Tod -ID <=