[CQ-Contest] Non-contesting 10 meter window

[Bill Fisher - W4AN]

On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Henderson, Dan N1ND wrote:

> There are a couple of things in regards to the non-contest window on 10
> Meters for the ARRL 10 Meter contest.  Foremost is the fact that for
> Novice/Tech-Plus operators in the US that is their ONLY H.F. Phone band.
> If the rest of us don't wish to Contest, we can move to another band,
> including the WARC bands. For phone operation, the Novice/Tech-Plus
> licensees don't have that luxury; hence a small portion of their band
> has been set aside as non-contest window."  This seems reasonable and
> fair, and in the spirit of community.

Sounds good on the surface Dan.  BUT...

1)  There are darned few weekends per year where these few novices (who
dont like contesting) are burdened by the contest.  Even fewer considering
10 meters closed more years than it is open.  

2)  The novices who do like to contest are now minimized by 50KC to an
even more crowded part of the band due to the rule change.  Even with big
antennas and big power, it is difficult to maintain a frequency in this
segment of the band.  

3)  I dont believe we should be restricted from calling CQ toward LU to
work the LU novices.  You just took a lot of QSO's from the logs of a lot
of guys.  

4)  You present it as the novice/tech's as having no other option.  There
is, it's called CW.  


I'm very sorry that we must have had some poor contesting representation
when this rule change was considered and passed.  

Could you now tell us the procedure in getting it changed back?  

Thanks Dan.

73

Bill, W4AN


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com


>From Ron Stark <ku7y at dri.edu>  Mon Dec 14 19:26:09 1998
From: Ron Stark <ku7y at dri.edu> (Ron Stark)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 11:26:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] To keep or not to keep?
In-Reply-To: <006901be26ec$4cea1860$0f93e2c2 at pp2555>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.981214100101.2818A-100000 at vortex>


On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Igor Sokolov wrote:

>
**** snip **** 
> Find out I got the call sign  incorrectly. 

YOU got the call sign wrong. YOUR error.

> Then I have three options (only three?):
> 1) Delete the qso from the log (the station I have worked will loose points
> and possibly mult)

Why do you think you should make someone else pay for YOUR
error?

  **** snip ****

> In all 3 scenarios the price of the mistake is very high. Is there a legal
> way out without being much penalized for the mistake?

I thought part of the fun of contesting was working to improve
our skills so we make fewer mistakes. Having to pay a penalty
for our mistakes is a good modavatior!

Here is something to think about:

Lets say you work me thinking I'm KL7Y. Then after the QSO you
copy my call right as KU7Y and delete it so you can go back to
your run freq.

When I look over the list of NIL's I see your call and remember
this post.

In the next contest I work you and then remove it from my
log to be sure I don't lose it during scoring like last time!

Sounds fair to me!

We all do our best, make our own mistakes and pay our own
penalties.

73, Ron,     SOWP 5545M,

.........KU7Y.....ARCI #8829.....Monte "Ron" Stark.....
....ku7y at sage.dri.edu...........Washoe Lake, Nevada....
....QRP-L #17...ARS #49...NorCal #330.....NRA LIFE.....

--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com