CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] The thread that will not die

To: "Art Boyars" <art.boyars@verizon.net>,<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The thread that will not die
From: "N8IE" <n8ie@woh.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:33:06 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Well said Art.

73
Dan, N8IE

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Art Boyars" <art.boyars@verizon.net>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 7:46 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] The thread that will not die


> W7GG tries again:
>
> "if u think ss is so much fun try the naqp ....
> it fixes all the things that are annoying in the ss!
>
> "for example:  its 12 hours shorter, u can work stations agn on each band, 
> the xhange is shorter, and mults count agn on each band ....  etc
>
> "not to detract from the ss format or heritage but it cud be made better 
> if the sponsor saw fit .... "
>
> I vote NO!  I like it the way it is (but I am glad that it is no longer 
> two weekends).  There are NAQPs and other tests for people who don't like 
> the challenge of grinding it out. If you go to the band-QSOs and 
> band-mults, it'll just make it less fun for the little guys (like me). 
> And as for the exchange being "too long" -- gee whiz!  Let there be at 
> least one contest where we have to prove that we can communicate.  With 
> SCP and automated computer logging the WW DX tests hardly require copying 
> ANY info; everybody is busy before the test making sure that the dot-cty 
> files have the right zone for every ham in the world.
>
> I wish this idea for "fixing" SS would go away forever.  But that's an 
> unrealistic hope.  So, instead, I'll hope for enough patience to politely 
> disagree every time somebody pushes its head above the ground.
>
> Now I'll go back to trying to figure out how to improve my skills and 
> strategy for SS next year.
>
> (And BTW, I see that most people think that current SO2R practice --  
> including "dueling CQs" -- is acceptable.  I was QRT from about 1981 to 
> 2000, and I missed those developments.  I'll not raise the issue again.)
>
> 73, Art K3KU (that little signal you could not quite copy in SS SSB)
> _______________________________________________
> 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>