ES5TV wrote:
>Hi Joe,
>well, you are wrong. It matters whether contesters like it and that is the
only thing that matters. We are not making money in contesting and it has to
be maximum fun for majority. If the packet-like effect of Skimmer and most
of the contesters' opposition to it will be clear the rules will be changed
to prohibit it or similar devices. Contests are run by contesters for
contesters and if new technology means that robots will take over operating
from us then it is obvious that we are not going to let that happen. There
is no other way than to correct rules ASAP and we will do it! And guess
what, there is nothing you can do about it and there is nobody to sue:)
Well stated Tonno. Here are several bits of data to support
your opinion..."It matters whether contesters like it and that is
the only thing that matters."
1. By a ~2:1 margin contesters DO NOT want Skimmer in Unassisted.
(58% against Skimmer, 32% for, poll now closed after 459 votes)
http://www.contesting.com/survey/204
2. By a ~2:1 margin contesters prefer Unassisted in CQ WW and ARRL SS.
(69% unassisted, 31% assisted based on actual 2007 contest participation)
http://dayton.contesting.com/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00295.html
3. By a ~3:1 margin, contesters do not want the CQ WW
Unassisted and Assisted categories merged.
(after 104 votes currently 70% against merging, 23% for)
http://www.contesting.com/survey/
>And I am afraid your opinion does not matter much here concerning the SO
issue as I don't see any scores of yours in 3830, I have not worked you in
any contest over 15 years in the air. I only have to follow your endless
crusade against the contesters here in the list and I am honestly really
tired of seeing the same arguments repeated over tens and tens of identical
messages. Your point has been made clear long ago so please let it go now
and let's rather hear the opinions of those contesters who haven't yet
spoken.
While I highly respect Joe's opinions on pure technical
issues, I agree with you. I often evaluate Internet comments
against the actual achievements of the writer, whether it's
contesting or DX-ing. Often the least outspoken guys are found
in the Top Ten results...and the most outspoken are *not* to be
found there.
It seems clear from the data above how existing
contesters feel regarding this issue. Sponsors who choose
to ignore the preferences of their participants are certainly
free to do so but so are the participants in choosing whether
to enter their contest. I agree that it's all about "maximum
fun for the majority". If a particular contest doesn't meet that
definition for most, then participation will suffer. It also
seems ludicrous to risk alienating 2/3 of the participant base
in order to attract an unknown number of newcomers. That
simply doesn't make much sense to me.
73, Bill W4ZV
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|