[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] New Category Suggestion

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] New Category Suggestion
From: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 10:49:16 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

I saw it differently. It seemed to me that NN4X was being quite disrespectful toward skilled operators, who by simple virtue of not being able to afford a competent station of their own, should be discriminated against if they get the opportunity to compete from a better station. His suggestion would also open up an endless and contentious argument of what exactly qualifies for such a category, as at least a few replies here have already identified.

A silly suggestion isn't courage.

Dave   AB7E

On 9/8/2016 6:58 AM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
I understand the point that NN4X was making. Do people need to be arseholes when they don't necessarily agree?

I thought the purpose of this reflector was to discuss and debate ideas, concepts, etc. I didn't realize that I had to agree with a particular mantra to be a member of the list.

This list has devolved into name calling and many are quite disrespectful of others opinions and comments.

I guess this is what happens when people become old farts?

These posts just show that hams are just like everyone else. The disrespect shown toward others in the real world is about the same as in this reflector. I used to think Ham Radio people were better people, would never cheat, treated others as they would like to be treated. No longer.

Is there a particular platform that members of this list must conform to in order to be accepted?

At least NN4X has the courage to make some suggestions. Most simply continue to keep their heads firmly planted in the sand.

The value of this list continues to fade.


CQ-Contest mailing list

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