CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] cqcontest.net

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cqcontest.net
From: "N2TK, Tony" <tony.kaz@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2016 18:20:02 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
For my own selfish reasons I would like to see SO1R and SO2R Unassisted
separate.

73,
N2TK, Tony

-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ed
Sawyer
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 1:19 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cqcontest.net

Ditto the KD4D post.

 

Why don't we let the unassisted operators decide whether the concern of
assisted ops invading our category is worth eliminating it over the concern?


 

No reason to merge the 2 categories and then do an overlay.  Just leave it
the way it is and clarify reasonable questions like Braco's question.

 

By the way, do to great efforts of the organizations and contest managers,
doesn't the ARRL and CQ contests represent something like 75%+ of all the
contest Qs made in a year?  Why exactly should this majority follow the
"rest of the world" minority?  Just sayin.

 

Ed  N1UR

_______________________________________________
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

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