I can't speak for why the Contest Committee did it, but I see one very good
reason to have done so:
There is only so much spectrum available for us. In contests it is much
less than we would like to have. This will especially be true as solar
activity declines (a very likely long term trend), and is more of a problem on
SSB.
For a multi to tie up more than one available frequency on a band and
thereby deny another station a usable run frequency is wrong. Even for the
smallest guys, one less station CQing is one less station they can work.
Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should be done.
73 - Jim K8MR
In a message dated 8/18/2011 8:30:41 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
rantalaane@gmail.com writes:
CQWW CC has created a totally unnecessary rule change for multi-ops in
CQWW:
12. When two or more transmitters are present on a band, either a
software or hardware device MUST be used to prevent more than one
signal at any one time;&xnbsp; interlocking two or more transmitters
on a band with alternating CQs (soliciting contacts) is not allowed.
Those who have the capabilities of creating such a station that allows
alternate CQ's on the same band and the skills to use it efficiently
should be allowed to do it. I wonder what is behind this rule again?
We have seen past few days that the signal interlocking rule can be
enforced is one wants to it as RDXC CC has done.
Juha OH6XX
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|