[CQ-Contest] Packet pile ups - do we need them?

[Dominiak, Michael]

I for one, enjoy using packet in contests for hunting down multipliers and
watching whats on the band.  However, I also believe that packet assistance
has gotten to the point it has made contesting worse, and overall less fun
for a lot of participants.  It reduces skillful operating practices, and
generally reduces the competitiveness of contesting. I think the packet
assisted category should be eliminated.  I also think that unassisted
stations not be allowed to make "blind" packet spots, as this just feeds the
problem. To compensate and level the playing field, I think we should rather
provide a multiplier incentive for unassisted stations.  For example, if
unassisted stations received a point multiplier of 1.1, while packet
assisted stations received x 1.0, you would see a decrease in the number of
participants using packet next year.  The value of the point multiplier
could be adjusted and fine-tuned until the packet advantage was completely
erased making it possible for assisted and unassisted to compete in the same
category, and at the same time reduce the number of stations jumping into
packet pileup meltdowns. How many of the big gun multi-multi's would really
use packet next year if they had to accept a 10% disadvantage for using it?
How many of the single op stations would want to stop using packet if the
incentive was right?


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