CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] New Contesting Classification

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] New Contesting Classification
From: Paul O'Kane <pokane@ei5di.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 14:47:49 +0100
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On 10/09/2016 09:46, Mike Lonneke via CQ-Contest wrote:

The idea of creating a special contest classification for operators who use a remote 
station "not their own" strikes me as an answer looking for a question.  What 
would it accomplish?

If ever there was a group of operators who should be
classified separately, it is remote operators.

Why?  Because the facts are that -

1.  Those operators are at all times communicating over the
    internet.

2.  Without the internet, there would be no communications
    whatsoever with operators who are not on the internet.

They are not radio amateurs, they are hybrid-communications
amateurs.

Mike asks - Is there supposed to be some sort of "shame"
attached to operating remotely?

The answer is "Yes, because you're on the internet".

73,
Paul EI5DI

ps - From David Hare - The Guardian, September 3 2106

 "In an internet age it is, at first glance, democratic to
 say that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. That
 is surely true. It is however a fatal step to then claim
 that all opinions are equal. Some opinions are backed by
 fact. Others are not. And those that are not backed by
 fact are worth considerably less than those that are."





_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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