At 11:08 AM 9/15/2007, Bill Turner wrote:
>ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
>On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:29:36 -0600, "Jay Kloss" <n4cbk.jay@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
> >
> >I would be willing to bet that the guys who are running SO2R are
> >judging their relative success by comparing their scores to the other
> >guys who run SO2R.
>
>------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------
>
>You would lose that bet, Jay. This issue has been debated for a couple
>of years on this and other reflectors, and WITHOUT EXCEPTION, the SO2R
>guys want their score listings COMBINED with the SO1R guys.
The objection that I hear is to the idea of an SO2R category which is
distinct from the historically unlimited SO category rather than
adding an SO1R category as a restricted form of SO.
>Make of that what you will,
As long as the difference between proposing an SO2R category versus
an SO1R category is not seen as more than a trivial semantic
distinction, then Joe, Charlie, et al. are right... Here we go again. :-)
73,
Mike K1MK
Michael Keane K1MK
k1mk@alum.mit.edu
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|