[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update
From: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:36:28 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

Say what? Fight back?? The last thing contesters need is to get pig headed and pick a fight with other hams over agreements that have been in place for decades. We don't occupy less than 20% of weekend activity because anybody else is preventing us from using more of it, and to claim that we need to "fight back" to use more of it is profoundly absurd.

You just made me embarrassed to be a contester.

Dave   AB7E

On 08/07/13, w5ov@w5ov.com wrote:

Since the WARC bands are contest-free bands, where's the balance?

Where are the contesting-only bands?

Of course, there are none. And, it would be absurd to presume that there
should be.

However, non-contesters are allowed to hold a similar absurd opinion and
are in fact, encouraged by some to seek to have contest band segments
established and the like in order to limit contest use of the bands.

When will there be fairness? When will non-contesters realize that they
have exclusive non-contest allocations and that they should stop

Seriously, while there are contests pretty much every weekend, less than
10 weekends a year (less than 20% of the weekends) have major contests on
them that dominate the bands and most of those are one mode at a time.

Is less than 20% of the weekends really too much to ask for contesters ?


So, non-contesters get greater than 80% of the year without a major
contest going on and they also get 3 (albeit small) bands where contest
activity is precluded.

Exactly how much would be enough for non-contesters? Hmmm?

We need to fight back.


Bob W5OV

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>