[CCF] Skimmer/Cluster in SAC?

Mats Strandberg sm6lrr at gmail.com
Tue Sep 21 23:29:04 PDT 2010

Hello Mr Journalist! ;)

(Sorry for SPAM)

I will try to answer your questions from my personal perspective. Hopefully
others with insight in preparations for SAC 2008-2010 will also feel
stimulated to reply with their opinions.

 I see "Contest Managers" (Tab) at the sactest.net (with 4 names),
 and I see a signature of "SAC Contest Committee" in the "Home" -Tab
 Under news (2010-Jun-01). Q1 Are these the same?

This text has been formulated by one of the Nordic HF Contest Managers and
duly signed as the "SAC Contest Committee". The page www.sactest.net can not
be edited my me. SM3CER is the person that has prepared the three news items
as shown in the "Home" -Tab. The first two concerned SAC 2009 which were
organized by SSA. The third one, I assume that SM3CER has formulated in full
common understanding with the other three HF Contest Managers

 => Q2 Is sactest.net supported by the four Contest Managers?


There is no "About" - Tab at sactest.net, where one could find information
 about the people responsible for the great service. Q3 Whom can we thank?

Exactly which "great service" are you referring to?  For the www.sactest.net,
you can address the appreciation to SSA and those who actively have
participated in the creation of www.sactest.net   If you for some reason
have the opinion that marketing and promotion of SAC 2007-2010 has been
good, then I think to what persons you can send the appreciation to.

 I don't know why they seem to be inactive. Q4 Has the criticism invoked
 it? The "coup" of the Scandinavian participants? Not always do people
 like it when they are openly criticized.

Critisism of a Contest Committee is not based on subjective opinions or
taken from the blue. The handling of awards and plaques had much to wish.
SSA had a backlog of plaques from 1996! This has now been fixed. The other
three countries also seem to have taken the responsibility for this serious
shortcoming. The SSA Contest Committee is the overall responsible of such
shortcomings, although the direct responsibility is on the organizing
country of the particular years.

Marketing and Promotion of SAC is another very critical success factor. The
overall responsibility should be of the SAC Contest Committee.

The adjustment of rules is only the responsibility of the SAC Contest

If a Management Group is failing to perform main duties in a satisfactory
way, then automatically critisism will follow. If the SAC Contest Committee
fully performs all duties according to - or even exceeding the expectations,
no critisism will be received. On contrary, people will praise them for
their good and efficient work.

My opinion (as well as the opinion of many other Nordic contesters) is that
the exitsing SAC Contest Committee has partly (or more) failed to comply
with the expectations. As simple as that!

The pilot (poll) that you are requesting instead of using the reflector has
already been performed Ilkka. OH1RX made a serious poll several years ago.
We repeated this poll verbally at CCF meetings. The feedback supports what I
am stating above. It also demands the formation of an Permanent
Independent SAC Committee. Two of the Nordic HF Contest Managers support
this proposal. They represent 75% of the SAC participants (based on received
logs in SAC 2009). Still, two of the managers from the smallest SAC
countries oppose the opinion of the poll and do not respect the wish of the
vast majority of the contesters in the Nordic countries. This is an amazing
fact, don't you think?

During the last period I have approached the most active contesters in those
two countries (Norway and Denmark). Without mentioning any names, many of
these active contesters also support the creation of a new Permanent
Independent SAC Committee, with the aim to replace the rotating scheme of
organization that has PROVED to be inefficient.

How long shall active contesters in the Nordic countries have to wait before
the obsolete and non-functioning organization is updated to a modern format?

The Nordic leagues can still be active (or even extremely active) in the new
proposed constellation of a permanent committee. There is no conflict
between the new proposed organization and active participation from the
leagues. The issue is that the correct and motivated people must be the core
of a contest committee. This is NOT the case now!

73 de SM6LRR, Mats

2010/9/22 Ilkka Korpela <Ilkka.Korpela at helsinki.fi>

> Quoting "Mats Strandberg" <sm6lrr at gmail.com>:
> Moi
>  I write this msg, although it probably only messes up
>  things. I have a few Qs. Consider me a "journalist" (PileUP!).
> Hi Ilkka,
>> The SAC Contest Committee is needless to say the HF Contest Managers
>> of Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark. This is a common knowledge that
>> most
>> of us have no problem to realize.
>  I see "Contest Managers" (Tab) at the sactest.net (with 4 names),
>  and I see a signature of "SAC Contest Committee" in the "Home" -Tab
>  Under news (2010-Jun-01). Q1 Are these the same?
>  Rules mention "Source: OZ5WQ" to me it seems as if he's not actively
>  participating in sactest.net. I'd expect him to sign the rules/invitation
>  of 2010.  EDR pages had 3 days into the contest
>  the announcements only in Danish.
>  => Q2 Is sactest.net supported by the four Contest Managers?
>  There is no "About" - Tab at sactest.net, where one could find
> information
>  about the people responsible for the great service. Q3 Whom can we thank?
>> Of course it would be good if the Contest Committee acts early by
>> adjusting
>> the rules to the reality, and find ways for how to co-operate in a timely
>> and efficient manner.
>> However, my question has nothing of a "semi-official" touch or ambition.
>> It
>> was an expression of a feeling that few of the Scandinavian participants
>> in
>> SAC has the slightest clue about - namely how skimmer or RBN affects the
>> reality for Non-Scandinavian participants in SAC nowadays.
>> If we shall only let the SAC CC act or to express concerns, opinions and
>> suggestions, then I am sure we will have to wait for a day or two until
>> something will happen. If someone has a problem with open dialogue around
>> our common contest, then please address that to the four members of the
>> "SAC
>> Contest Committee", with a suggestion for them to take the lead in the
>> process of keeping SAC up to date. Their silence is a reason for many
>> "semi
>> offical" expressions and actions...
>  I don't know why they seem to be inactive. Q4 Has the criticism invoked
>  it? The "coup" of the Scandinavian participants? Not always do people
>  like it when they are openly criticized.
>> The rules of today have been in need for at least some small adjustment,
>> due
>> to appearance of new technology since the time of the paper-logs.... but
>> not
>> even that has been accomplished in the 5 or more years this has been a
>> valid issue...
>  This a fair argument, I'm only saying that an e-mail reflector
>  cannot be used for studying the opinion spectrum of hundreds of
>  participants but you can do a pilot..
>> So Illka, if you personally can not handle open discussion through TOEC or
>> CCF, where actually important subjects are questioned or commented, I
>> would
>> suggest that you contact your HF Contest Manager in Finland and ask him to
>> act on behalf of you and others that might have the same opinion as you.
>  To be honest, I trust my manager 100%. This is how things work.
> I have no ambitions to change any rules of SAC in a "semi official way",
>> but
>> to share some of the impressions I have from SAC 2010 CW contest...  If
>> you
>> are of the opinion that SAC CC is handling things in the way they should
>> be
>> handled - you are of course entitled to this opinion.
>> My opinion is that the efficiency of the "SAC Contest Committe"
>> definitely has a potential to be improved. One first step is to actually
>> start acting as Managers - to cooperate, to develop and to sort out common
>> challenges related to SAC issues. If silence and non-activity are
>> keywords,
>> then such discussions are created.
>> Please Ilkka, I am also keen to know what kind of "elegant treatment of
>> SAC"
>> you have seen during the last years. Absence of action - is that called
>> "elegant treatment" in your opinion?
>  I have seen people actively promoting the contest (Fans), people offering
>  their help to the organization, the sactest.net - these come to my mind.
>  But I still believe SAC is the contest of the Nordic leagues, and they
>  must be actively involved - somehow - in a more positive way than thru
>  critisism (which I'm good at and doing now).
>  The other option is to let SAC, as we know it, to die (if left
> non-nurished
>  by the leagues), and start "SDR-SAC" or eq.
> ilkka
>> SM6LRR, Mats
>> 2010/9/21 Ilkka Korpela <Ilkka.Korpela at helsinki.fi>
>> Hi Folks
>>> I did more thinking: Why doesn't sactest.net provide
>>> a platform, where everyone can send the telemetry from
>>> their station?
>>> - frequency of the TX
>>> - frequency of the RX with the operator on-line
>>> - frequency range of the SDRs in use
>>> - frequencies of the RX-stations around the world that one listens to
>>>  (using some decoder)
>>> Then we'd just let the computerized stations to work the contest.
>>> Seriously, we are not far from this scenario.
>>> Less seriously, who'd care?
>>> I guess I would.
>>> I don't like these "discussions", and especially when they are
>>> "semi-officially"
>>> started by SM6LRR, who is not an official member of the SAC contest
>>> Committee,
>>> that consists of representatives of SRAL, SSA, EDR, and NRRL (and the
>>> small
>>> ones). I'm again asking, who are the members (I asked this a while back)?
>>> I'm more in favor of an approach, in which the Committee asks the
>>> participants,
>>> e.g. when the results are sent to the participants by e-email, to
>>> register
>>> and give opinions at a website. That's fair.
>>> SAC deserves more elegant treatment.
>>> ilkka
> --
>  Ilkka Korpela
> http://www.helsinki.fi/~korpela

More information about the CCF mailing list