I read what you wrote several times.
Guessing there will be another similar posting within a decade when someone
will yearn for the good ole days when you could click on an Internet spot and
press F4 to call a new multiplier instead of having a fully automated robot
work the contest for you.
Sadly, what you wrote will not reverse what is destined to happen. However,
the mention of those call signs brought back a lot of memories, and what you
wrote is without any doubt in my mind deserving of a standing ovation.
Sent from my iPad
> On Dec 11, 2014, at 2:41 PM, JIM NEIGER <email@example.com> wrote:
> As I approach my 76th birthday and in my 61st year of ham radio and
> contesting - I often reflect on what has made my life, and ham radio in
> general and contesting in particular, meaningful, interesting,
> disappointing, profound, and fun. And over the course of these personal
> reflections - I've acquired a list of what I call the Axioms of Life. Some
> are useful; some are outright banal and trite. But one I've observed to be
> true more often than not:
> The Top Never Pulls the Bottom Up;
> The Bottom Always Drags the Top
> Like Charly and others opine - the essence of ham radio contesting has
> morphed into another hobby in which the Internet appears to be the center
> hub. For those who use it, love it, couldn't/wouldn't live or operate
> without it: enjoy.
> Many words and opinions have been conveyed here, so no sense repeating the
> obvious. Many defenses to what I might loosely label Internet/Radio
> Contesting rationalize that it's an advancement of technology, and if you use
> a memory keyer, or a computer, or didn't build your radio yourself, you then
> must also sign up to all advancements in technology. Or not.
> Some like to learn and operate the code; some do not. Some take pride in
> finding their own DX; some obviously couldn't care less. The score, the ease
> of moving it upwards is all that appears to matter. And that's OK. I guess.
> But to rationalize it to be SERIOUS radio contesting really does, I believe,
> a dis-service to the traditions and memories and the legacies of our friends
> and great contesting operators of the past, that REALLY made our hobby what
> it is. Or was.... Gentlemen that I idolized, and later was privileged to
> know, when I started in 1954 - like W6AM, KH6IJ, W4KFC, ZD8J, W9IOP. Too
> many, of today's stalwart Internet Operators didn't have the privilege to
> listen to Vic Clark run Sweepstakes on CW. Or Nosey KH6IJ telling us on SSB:
> "I know MY call; I want to know yours" Or W6AM busting the pileups with his
> rhombics. Or ZD8J winning CQ WW CW in back to back years with a BUG !!
> Operator SKILL used to be what mattered most in contesting. Today, it
> appears to be something else. And I think those who want to declare
> themselves some kind of "winners" through their Internet prowess have really
> missed the boat. But everyone today appears to be entrenched in their way,
> and no one is going to change any minds about anything.
> I just did 48 hours straight in WW SSB and 46 of 48 in WW CW. Did I win
> the world? Nope. Did I qualify for the next WRTC? Doubtful. Did I use the
> Internet? Nope. And it was fun.
> And in my heart of hearts, I like to think my friends above: Don, Nosey, Vic,
> John, and Larry would've been proud.
> Vy 73,
> Jim Neiger N6TJ
> -----Original Message----- From: Charles Harpole
> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:15 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Cc: CQ-Contest Reflector
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Qualifying & RDXC
> Yes W2LC, the movement to station automation lately is the evolution of
> real ham radio into another hobby, related but different. When some hams
> lost the joy of discovery and happenstance...the essence of ham radio...
> they turned the corner into another hobby which unfortunately intrudes on
> the essence and destroys it by intermixing the two.
> Of course, we few can still practice real ham radio and try to cope with
> the new hobby tuning in, but it is still a sad happening to see a real
> human joy slowly disappear. Bye bye, Charly
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:19 AM, <email@example.com> wrote:
>> I don't operate assisted. Why? I'm not interested in RBN, skimmer,
>> internet spots, etc. Those are cute technologies but of no interest to me.
>> I do single-op, mostly one radio, and I balance running with S&P. That's
>> why I dislike the non-IDers, I actually S&P.
>> For WRTC NA2 you must join several multi's if you wish to place near the
>> top of the standings. Strictly going single-op won't get you there without
>> a Herculean effort.
>> And if I did go assisted what would I get?
>> An internet connection that is unreliable and fails on a daily basis.
>> Those of you in EU (and you too Randy, and I'm sorry for picking on you,
>> well ... a little bit), please understand that there are many areas of the
>> US that do not have reliable internet. I am in one of those locations, and
>> I am not that far out into the countryside. FIOS? yep they have called me,
>> but when they hear where I am, in relation to their service, they say
>> "never mind".
>> I probably will not have truely reliable internet at home in my lifetime.
>> Why? Not enough customers in my area to make it economically profitable
>> the internet provider. I am the next to last house on the cable. I'm not
>> sure what the next house does. No big deal, that is just the way it is. I
>> don't use spots anyway. And the only reason TW ran the cable this far out
>> (for a relatively small number of customers) is because one of the town
>> board members lives next door, otherwise I guess would have to use my cell
>> phone. Ooops my cell service is marginal too, scratch that, but ok for my
>> limited use.
>> The plus side for my locaton is the noise level, I am fortunate to have a
>> nearly zero noise level. I would rather have that, than better internet
>> service any day.
>> As for RDXC, I am disqualified even before the start: (kind of, I
>> 11.11 Logs for high scores claiming to be in the top 3 list of any contest
>> category (p 3, 3.3) must indicate the frequency of every QSO made (CAT
>> system use) with a minimum resolution of 1 kHz.
>> 11.11.1 An applicant will not be awarded any of the final "Top 3" places
>> of any category unless exact frequency of every QSO made is indicated.
>> So I cannot use RDXC for WRTC qualifying at least not if I place well,
>> I'll be DQ'ed for not having exact frequencies in my log ("will not be
>> awarded" = "DQ", right?). Didn't someone say that not having exact
>> frequencies makes you a cheater? No it doesn't.
>> I use analog radios, remember those? And they don't have a CAT interface
>> so I cannot comply with the frequency rule, unless I manually record
>> frequencies. Not gonna do that. I like the radios I am using, they work
>> very well. No lectures on older radios please.
>> Therefore a question for the RDXC contest committee, why would I operate
>> your contest when, if I place in the top 3, I will be DQ'ed? Not awarded
>> I figure to get into the 21st century I need to spend aboout $50,000 USD.
>> 2 new radios, 2 new power amplifiers (a couple of those EU 3500W units
>> ought to do it, I'll run them conservatively), another tower or two,
>> mono-banders, and a house in the Hamptons. A lot of money for maybe a few
>> hundred more QSO's.
>> Maybe, just maybe 2015 will bring a new radio, but which one? I've heard
>> so many bad comments on all of the major radio brands, it is difficult to
>> 73 Scott W2LC
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
> Charly, HS0ZCW
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list