re

[Waltk at PICA.ARMY.MIL]

Zweibek, KR2Q, writes:

>Placing #3, 4, or 5 SOA,
>or placing in the TOP TEN (even tenth) for non-assisted?  If you can't
>be PROUD of your score, because of what OTHERS say, maybe you're in it
>for the wrong reason.

Here we go agin' with this "SO" is for real men snobbery.  I'm getting 
sick and tired of you helping to perpetuate this attitude, Doug. 
Get off your high horse and join the rest of us.

......................................................................
73 de Walt Kornienko  -   K2WK		Internet:  waltk at pica.army.mil
DX PacketCluster:  K2WK > W3MM  (FRC) 	Packet: K2WK at N2ERH.NJ.USA.NOAM
______________________________________________________________________

>From Daniel R. Violette" <Daniel_R._Violette at smtpgty.anatcp.rockwell.com  Mon Oct  3 23:08:41 1994
From: Daniel R. Violette" <Daniel_R._Violette at smtpgty.anatcp.rockwell.com (Daniel R. Violette)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 94 14:08:41 PST
Subject: Individual Scores on the Reflector
Message-ID: <9409037812.AA781218815 at smtpgty.anatcp.rockwell.com>

     Disclaimer - This is not meant to get a big discussion going and I may 
     be in the minority.
     
     I personally do not like to see every individual score posted.  Sure 
     multiplies the number of messages received the week or so after 
     contests (used to be MAJOR contests, now most any will do).  I DO VERY 
     MUCH LIKE the high claimed and other lists of scores.  I wish I was in 
     a position to volunteer to take on a contest or two to summarize, but 
     just can't at this time.
     
     Maybe this will trigger more to volunteer to summarize.  I know that 
     KA9FOX has done it for some contests and some contest sponsors or 
     volunteers for the sponsors have done it (such as N6TR, etc.).
     
     Again I hope this doesn't get into a big discussion.  The scores are 
     only a minor nuisance, I can delete then in a few seconds once I see 
     what it is (does add up though on Mondays after a contest).  On the 
     otherhand, plentiful discussions on trivial subjects need a little 
     reading before trashing to the bit bucket.
     
     73, 
     
     Dan   KI6X
     
     e-mail:  Daniel_R._Violette at smtpgty.anatcp.rockwell.com



>From Draper, Bruce L." <draperbl%smtplink.mdl.sandia.gov at sass165.sandia.gov  Mon Oct  3 22:41:23 1994
From: Draper, Bruce L." <draperbl%smtplink.mdl.sandia.gov at sass165.sandia.gov (Draper, Bruce L.)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 94 15:41:23 MDT
Subject: Individual Scores on the Reflector
Message-ID: <9409037812.AA781224083 at smtplink.mdl.sandia.gov>

KI6X writes:
     
     I personally do not like to see every individual score posted.  
________________________________________

My 2 cents' worth:

I don't necessarily like to see each of the *scores* posted, but I
thoroughly enjoy studying the comments.  Besides the entertainment
value, many are educational . . . I firmly believe that my position in
several contests was improved significantly by paying attention to
remarks made here about things like propagation and times for band 
changes during the week before the contest (e.g., cw sprint and SS data
the week before the phone events).

Keep 'em coming. 

       -Bruce  AA5B


>From milewski at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU (Steve Milewski)  Tue Oct  4 00:06:32 1994
From: milewski at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU (Steve Milewski) (Steve Milewski)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 1994 16:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Summary: Can We Do This?
Message-ID: <01HHUGALGRLE8ZHMWV at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU>

Last week I posted the question about whether we could enter contests like
CQWW & ARRL DX with a single band entry while, at the same time, operating
the other bands to run up personal band totals, new countries, etc.

Everyone who answered my post said, "yes, no problem. Indicate your entry
very clearly and send in the other QSO's as a checklog".

HOWEVER, an interesting point came up in various replies. And that is -
what about those "extra" contacts counting for a club entry?

There were several conflicting answers and I have not been able to get any
clarification from officials of CQ or ARRL.

I have been told in the e-mail replies that in the CQ contests, if I
entered a single band category and worked "extra" contacts on the other
bands... they WOULD BE counted for any club entry.

On the other hand, the responses indicated that in ARRL contests, ONLY THE
CONTACTS WHICH I CLAIMED AS PART OF MY ENTRY would be able to count as part
of a club entry.

Just thought you might like to know.
73,

Steve Milewski
milewski at oregon.uoregon.edu
Ham: AA7FL
 *** Stumps don't lie! ***



>From James White <0006492564 at mcimail.com>  Tue Oct  4 00:26:00 1994
From: James White <0006492564 at mcimail.com> (James White)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 94 18:26 EST
Subject: It ain't a macho thing
Message-ID: <50941003232605/0006492564PK1EM at MCIMAIL.COM>

        I too am getting tired of the single op assisted thing raising its
head again and again. It is very clear to me that if one person's mind alone
created a score he is a single op, if the gray cells of another helped he
ain't solo - he's been assisted, period.  
        Many of you have, and will say again that I am an assisted op by
virtue of the fact that I operate (usually) from my parents QTH and since
they are hams, too - well it is obvious they have assisted in the sense that
I have a station engineer who has prepped things....coupled with the fact
that my Mom knows to serve me sandwiches in ziplock bags so that I don't get
the food on my sending/logging hands - obviously I feel this is not so - I
had to get this said though before others voiced it as they always do...if
you think this is an advantage, have your wife assist you in the sandwich
department, too!
        Being packetless is not a macho man thing at all.  Those who
perceive it as such should reevaluate their own self doubts as to their
ability or unfulfilled desire to have done it alone. 
        If you think that packet is simply part of the evolution of
contesting, you are quite right...however it is a part of the evolution of
multi-single. Like the way that the original multi-singles were one rig
stations with a guy who would stand up wearily at xx:xx zulu, joints
snapping and popping, taking off the cans and passing them to another
operator who would in turn put 'em on VERSUS todays multi-station
multi-singles. These multi-stations now include a "new" station...the packet
station...that is all...it is another member of the crew whose specialty is
multipliers. 
        Keep the unassisted efforts of those who chose to be unassisted
separate from those who choose not to...leave debates as to whether or not
it is an aide as debates...YES, WE HAVE SEEN IT DON'T SEEM TO HELP HERE IN
THE STATES, BUT DO NOT USE THAT LOGIC TO JUSTIFY THE INCLUSION OF THOSE WHO
HAD SOMEONE ELSE'S GRAY CELLS DO SOME OF THE OPERATING ALONG WITH THOSE WHO
SIMPLY CHOSE TO GO IT ALONE...CONTESTING HAS MANY GREAT OPERATORS WHO HAVE
SETTLED ON HAM RADIO BECAUSE IT ALLOWS THEM TO GO IT ALONE.                 

       Congratulations to the California guys for once again putting on a
world class QSO party...Texans next, in three weeks...this is good, it is a
fitting warmup to SS CW.  I too enjoy seeing everyone's summaries of their
contest weekend...we share a common bond as contesters and can relate when
we hear the tales of TVI and blown SB220 rectifiers!  

        Good luck to everyone this Fall season...73,  
                        
                           Jim   K1zx


                        k1zx at micmail.com