| To: | "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>, <CQ-Contest@contesting.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Reverse Beacon Network - too much success? |
| From: | "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com> |
| Date: | Wed, 3 Mar 2010 10:02:42 -0600 |
| List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
> I hope it wouldn't take another 20 years until freely adopted > as with DX Cluster. -The contesters who have freely adopted DX Cluster are those -who don't know, or don't care, about the difference between -the internet and amateur radio. I agree with your premise, but only as it applies to contesters operating SO. Multi-Op stations don't have the option of classifying themselves differently for operating without packet, which clearly provides little incentive for them to refrain from using it. David ~ KY1V _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
| Previous by Date: | [CQ-Contest] SNS Thursday Night, Mike Wetzel |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Reverse Beacon Network - too much success?, David Kopacz |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Reverse Beacon Network - too much success?, George Vlachopoulos |
| Next by Thread: | [CQ-Contest] Cluster-bashing was: Re: Reverse Beacon Network - too much success?, Pete Smith |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |