Hi Gilles,
"First I am 49 and hope to be on the business for 2 or 3 more decades. hi"
I have you beat by a year -- I'm 50... so yes, I hope to be contesting
for 2 or 3 more decades also... man, I need those solar maximums!
''Remote receiving sites may be located anywhere''
You read that and nothing else. Did you read:
>From CQWW.COM:
"Advance notification: Entrants must notify the CQ WW Contest
Committee by e-mail at least one week in advance of the contest of
their intention to enter this category. This notification should
include a brief description of the technologies to be employed and
callsign to be used. Entrants must also attest that their planned
operation is compliant with the rules and regulations of the country
in which the transmitter(s) are located. Advance notification and
questions regarding these
rules should be sent via e-mail to <xtreme@cqww.com>."
This means that CQ KNOWS who will be using remote receivers. Stations
not informing the contest committee will be disqualified. If CQ knows
who is using remote receivers, they can publish a list of these
callsigns, which (hopefully) will be viewable by the public.
Those who chase Award Certificates can check with CQ to see if a
callsign qualifies for an award.
Award rules should not stiffle innovation -- we should find ways to
innovate and keep Award integrity intact. Outright banning specific
practices in a radio contest based on the rules of some other Award
just doesn't make sense.
On a personal note,
Do I agreee with the remote-receiver in another DXCC entity? It is
not really in the spirit of what we call "traditional radio", but I
believe there are very legitimate "real-radio" reasons for remote
receivers (just study HF radio history). However, I'm OK with the
rule, because, as I said in my previous post, having remote rx's in
many DXCC entities or Zones is just not very innovative in the
technology sense, is not advancing the radio art, and probably won't
produce too many "Wow's!" from the CQWW Judges.
Contester's have been among the top-tier innovaters in the technology
advances in Amateur Radio. Let's keep the tradition going.
73, Gerry W1VE/VE1RM
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 9:44 PM, VE2TZT<ve2tzt@arrl.net> wrote:
> Gerry,
>
> First I am 49 and hope to be on the business for 2 or 3 more decades. hi
>
> Last year on the reflector, I was one of the defenders of the use of DX
> cluster for regular SO categories and I am not against the Xtreme category.
>
> But, what you perhaps missed in the reading of those new rules is the
> consequences of this little sentence :
>
> ''Remote receiving sites may be located anywhere''
>
> We are not speaking here of very expensive set-up : for a few dollars,
> today, it is possible to add a public remote receiver to your station,
> working 24 /7.
> That means that several remote anonymous people can listen on your radio via
> internet 24/7.
>
> Encouraging that will quickly lead to a proliferation of public remote
> receivers owned by all sort of licensed or not hams/SWL's.
>
> Since such a public remote receiver exists in your home and hundreds of
> others all around the world, you can contact anybody on any band with a few
> mW transmitter and no receiver (the receiver is your PC connected to
> internet). In fact, you do not even need a transmitter, you just have to
> inject your audio transmission signal directly in the public remore receiver
> in your home. Then, you do not need anymore to be a licenced ham to make a
> qso, no RF is transmitted !!!
>
> If a big enought group of people are going in that (and it is really not
> expensive) , a part of the contest will be totaly virtual and out of the
> scope of a Radio activity, we are closer to a networking computer game (like
> the well known among teenagers Counter Strike), even non-hams can play.
>
> The positive side : no more antennas needed, no more bands/spectrum needed.
> The negative one : the federal authorities will fastly understand that they
> can get back ours bands and municipalities that we can put down our towers
> :``now you can do the same thing on internet without disturbing the
> neighbourhood``
>
> This is just an exemple, but the numerous malicious consequences of this
> little sentence are uncountable.
>
> I am not the kind of man to easily panic, but this time, I think that the
> threat is serious, far more than for exemple the BPL.
>
> In fact, I have never ever seen such a big threat for our activity.
>
> I think that what all the opponents are mostly wanting is the removal of
> that little sentence.
>
> 73's
>
> Gilles VE2TZT
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerry Hull" <gerry@w1ve.com>
> To: <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 7:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Xtreme category, catch 22
>
>
>> Soon we will all put ourselves out of business.
>>
>> Look at our average age. None of you are getting younger.
>>
>> You certainly have a right to fight for the status quo. Actually, you
>> have the status quo. Xtreme is a new category.
>>
>> If your brain can't get around it, don't enter the category -- You
>> won't be competing with Xtreme ops.
>>
>> If you read the rules carefully, a panel of judges will determine the
>> best use and final winner of the Xtreme category. If an Xtreme idiot
>> thinks they can win by pouring $$$ into remote rx's on each continent,
>> my feeling is the judges won't think this very creative -- especially
>> from a advance in technology perspective (heck, if you had the
>> money,you could have done this before the internet, although it would
>> have been cheating by existing rules).
>>
>> There are tons of concepts for exteme that dont focus on remote rx's.
>>
>> Try, my friends, try, to have a somewhat open mind. The Holy Grail of
>> Contesting, winning in a "standard" category, will be around for as
>> long as most of us are alive. Perhaps, maybe, we might get a few new
>> people interested in contesting with this category -- and perhaps more
>> QSOs.
>>
>> You guys are too uptight, but free to express your exasperation.
>>
>> 73, Gerry, W1VE
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|