Didn't think it would make a big difference if I participated or not in
WAE. However, over the years I passed out thousands of Qs and QTC. It's not a
whole lot different than boycotting a store when you disagree with their
policies. One person does not make a difference but many can. I wrote a
letter to DARC stating my thoughts. However, it's their contest and they can
run it anyway they want. But, it's my station and I'll choose to operate
in WAE or not...no hard feelings.
By the way I used to do the 10-10 contest seriously and won it several
times. I no longer do so since they have decided you must be a current member
to win. Again, no hard feelings, it's their contest. I just don't do
that one anymore. If others choose not to do a contest, then that contest
slowly fades away...like the FL QSO Party of the 70s and 80. The FL QSO Party
was brought back to life in the 90s with new rules and is now one of the
major QSO Parties.
I don't claim to have all the answers, but over 50 years of contesting give
me the right to speak with some knowledge of what contesting is all about
and what it's future should be. W0UA and K5GO have earned their stripes
too and have been around about as long as I have. They are not rookies and
what they as well as others (like K5ZD, K3LR et al)say should carry some
weight.
K4XS
In a message dated 3/18/2013 11:11:37 A.M. Coordinated Universal Tim,
w2up@comcast.net writes:
I guess if K5GO, W0UA and you already know the answers, there is no
point in doing the survey and soliciting thousands or opinions.
BTW, the WAE hasn't been the same without you... :-)
Barry W2UP
On 3/17/2013 09:23, Cqtestk4xs@aol.com wrote:
> Both K5GO and W0UA are right on the mark. Although I have begun to do
> assisted, many (perhaps the majority) of serious contesters do not. The
> concept of combining both into one category makes no sense to me.
>
> We want to encourage more participation, not discourage it. By passing
> such a rule, it would discourage many of the purists (no packet) from
> operating as is evidenced by the posts on this reflector. It would also
cut down
> some categories. Any time you cut the categories you deprive guys from
> winning a certificate. That piece of paper on the wall is what drives
many
> guys. Third place in W4-40 meters low power may not mean much to the
big
> guns, but it means a lot to a little gun who can put that paper on his
wall.
>
> I stopped operating the WAE when they eliminated the HF bracket and also
> combined all entries into one class whether or not they were assisted or
> not. Shame, since I was a serious participant and won several of the
"license
> plates" in the 90s.
>
> Let's not combine the classes, please! make sure you let the boys at
CQ
> know about this in their survey.
>
> Bill K4XS/KH7XS
>
>
> In a message dated 3/17/2013 3:07:40 P.M. Coordinated Universal Time,
> W0ua@aol.com writes:
>
> KILLING THE GOLDEN GOOSE
>
>
> I don't do these forum-things as a rule, but my friend K5GO tipped me
> that
> there was a serious (?) suggestion about "combining" the SOAB and SO (A)
> categories. Apparently there was a survey sent around, but I surely
> wasn't
> aware of it. (As an aside, I have to wonder how many more like me,
who've
> been in nearly every major CQ HF Contest over the last several years,
> were
> similarly unaware this was happening? How many of those who received
the
> survey might be "casual" entrants as opposed to serious SOAB-types?)
> Anyway,
> thanks for the heads-up, Stan, and I think I've seen enough of the
> discussion to pitch a few marbles into the ring...
>
> First, "combining" is a nice word that doesn't really mean what it says
in
>
> this discussion. What's being put forward is eliminating the SOAB
> category, in favor of the "Assisted" category. I've seen it said here
> that 33
> percent of the single-op entries are "Assisted." I take from this,
then,
> that 66 percent reside in the nominal SOAB category. That sounds like
a
> pretty healthy majority to me--surely not an anachronism ripe for the
> scrap
> heap! I submit that SOAB remains the greatest challenge in the contest
> game,
> requiring the highest levels of skill, dedication and endurance--which
is
> why it attracts so many of those folks for whom those qualities are
> valued.
> This catgeory comprises a big share of the best operators on this
> planet--who should likewise be highly-valued by the contest sponsors!
> So, am I
> getting this right--that the majority category...the category with so
> many
> outstanding competitors--the one presenting the highest challenge--this
> is the
> one we would even consider eliminating? The tail should wag the dog,
you
> say? That can't be right--I must be missing something here?
>
> I saw mention made that we need to get with the "new normal" in
> contesting.
> I'm guessing that this implies Internet assistance. Hasn't that already
> been fully accepted? As it stands, The "Assisted" category even runs
to
> single-band entrants. 33 percent may not be a majority but it is a
> sizable
> group and I think they've been nicely accommodated--there are clearly
lots
> of
> folks who enjoy and prefer this mode--and all the categories have been
> provided to support them. I'm not into "Assisted" myself, but if it
> floats
> peoples' boats and gets them on the air, that's all good. So, where's
> the
> problem in all this that requires kicking nominal SOAB to the curb?
> Again, I must be missing something here?
>
> I notice that the subject of cheating comes up in this chat, and with it
> come a couple of troubling implications:
>
> (1) That cheating (of the Internet variety) is taking place among
SOAB
> entrants
>
> (2) That this purported cheating cannot always be detected and
> ajudicated
> by the sponsors
>
> Certainly, SOAB is the most "cheatable" category--I'm sure it does
happen.
>
> That acknowledged, you can call me naive, but I don't think Internet
> cheating is either significant or widespread in the SOAB category.
> But...let's
> just say for a moment that it was: Would the proper response be to
> surrender to the cheaters and eliminate the mainstream category because
> it's
> "cheatable?" I enter SOAB contests believing that the overwhelming and
> pervasive ethic is for operating--as I do--on honorable terms.
Further, I
> trust
> the sponsors and administrators to protect the integrity of their events
> to
> the very best of their abilities and resources. I think we have to
> accept
> some factors as articles-of-faith--and we seem to have a majority of
> entrants willing to do just that. Eliminating our category-of-choice
> seems a
> rather shabby reward for our trust and devotion over not just years, but
> decades.
>
> I noticed one post here which posited that, in effect, this is all just
> about fun, leisure, relaxation. Playing 18 holes in the sun on a May
> afternoon is fun. Fly-fishing in a mountain stream is leisurely.
That
> is, unless
> you're striving to beat your best golf score or competing in
stroke-play
> against the club champ. Or, perhaps you're tracking fish caught, in a
> friendly game with your buddies. If there's competition involved (even
> with
> yourself), that always seems to add a little urgency to the
proceedings.
> The
> SOAB competition--arguably the toughest, the most individualistic test
of
> all--is about as "urgent" as it gets among it's skilled, dedicated and
> perennial devotees. Kill that off while it's still in its prime and
> you're
> amputating a healthy limb. Why would anyone want to do that? I must
be
> missing something here...
>
>
> Geo W0UA
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
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
|