Jim, et. al.,
That's an interesting approach, especially for the examples you cited.
On the other hand, it doesn't eliminate the problem I was trying to address.
That is where there is more than one QSO Party going on and you get an
exchange like "5NN BAY". You can guess that would be Bay County, but what
state? After you figured it out, you would have to enter the appropriate
information into the CONTEST field. And when the very next station gives you
"5NN BAY", you'd have to ask again.
Someone suggested they like the variety of exchanges. Fine. First, I am
suggesting the QSO Parties be viewed as a CLASS of contest, similar to
Sweepstakes, ARRL DX, and CQWW DX.
Second, I am only suggesting a change to using a standardized ST+CNTY
designator on both ends of the QSO. Score it anyway you want. Have serial
numbers if you want. Give extra points for "Bonus Stations" if you want.
That's all irrelevant to the "Location" issue.
Take this example of a typical QSO Party format. This is where the In-State
station sends their county abbreviation and the Out-State station sends
their state. I am an in-state fixed station. I work 500 contacts and log 75
"CA's", 89 "TX's", and 64 "NY's".
First, I would like to know what counties I have worked. I might be
interested in pursuing the County Hunter awards. I will need to use other
resources to know whether I have logged a new county.
Second, if I work someone in another QSO Party, they will give me their
county. That's great, but I will need to ask them for their state. Now I can
figure out what QSO Party they are running. Multiply this scenario by the
number of concurrent (overlapping) events running.
Third, after the dust settles, I need to figure out what to do with my log.
Your suggestion for a CONTEST column would be helpful. But a standardized
exchange of ST+CNTY would eliminate the need for this field in QSO Parties.
I could submit my log to 3 or 4 parties and let their log processing
software cull the contacts valid for their particular event. My log may
contain a number of BAY counties, some which would qualify as a valid QSO
while other Bay's would not.
Here's an extreme example to illustrate the problem. Imagine running three
DX contests over one weekend. One uses RST+CQ Zone, another uses RST+ITU
Zone, and the third uses RST+Age. Anyone can work anyone. That's what we had
on the bands last weekend.
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jimk8mr@aol.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 3:10 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Software for Multiple Contests
>
> The problem of logging software handling more than one contest at a time
> is
> not limited to state QSO Parties.
>
> The best example of this is probably the second weekend in September,
> when
> there is the WAE SSB, the ARRL VHF QSO Party, the NA SSB Sprint, and the
> Tennessee QSO Party. And probably some RTTY contest as well.
>
> There is no way these contests could share the same exchange.
>
> What the world needs now is a software package that will run multiple
> contests.
>
> I'm not a programmer, nor do I play one on TV, but what I envision is
> something like this:
>
> An extra field in the logging line, when running multiple contests, that
> would switch between contests. Something like:
>
> LINE TIME CONTEST BAND MODE CALL SENT
> RECEIVED
>
> 1 0001 WAE 7 SSB G4BUO
> 59
> 001 59 231
> 2 0002 WAE 7 SSB IR4T
> 59 002 59 313
> 3 0004 SPR 7 SSB K7RAT
> 1
> JIM 7 TREE OR
> 4 0007 VHF 144 CW K8GP
> EN91 FM08
> 5 0009 SPR 14 SSB K5TR
> 2 JIM 12 GEO TX
>
>
> The contest field would either be a direct entry ("VHF") or a toggle
> ("CTL-Something"). It would stay the same until switched, so you don't
> have to make
> an extra entry unless the guy you work is in a different contest than the
> previous qso.
>
> A lot of the fun in contesting, whether full or part time, is seeing how
> you
> are doing in real time. So when you change the contest field, the
> appropriate windows for scoring, multipliers, exchange memories, etc.,
> would pop up
> for that particular contest.
>
> When the contests are over, it ought not be a difficult problem to sort
> out
> each contest into its appropriate log, saving a lot of clutter at the log
> checking and reporting end.
>
> I for one am a lot more inclined to pass out qsos in a contest if I can
> keep
> track of all the normal information. Last weekend I heard some Italians in
> the ARI contest, but never called. With functioning logging software in
> front
> of me I probably would have.
>
> I for one am eagerly waiting.
>
>
> 73 - Jim K8MR
>
>
>
> **************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on
> family
> favorites at AOL Food.
> (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|