[CQ-Contest] STUFF

Leigh S. Jones kr6x at kr6x.com
Sat Jan 25 19:55:10 EST 2003

I can't say that I agree with either side of this exchange.

Frankly, I find a number of operating practices that are common now to
be an
annoyance.  I don't enjoy passing multipliers band to band, and I
don't enjoy
using packet or any other spotting technology.  I'd prefer to compete
in a
contesting world that didn't even allow multioperator stations to use
I'd prefer having hard and fast rules against making contest schedules
of any
kind -- either before the contest begins or on the fly during
contests -- except
perhaps something like "I can't copy your zone on this frequency now
Bob has fired up his CQ machine here, let's go up 5 or so and try
If I could come up with a workable rule to outlaw multiplier passing
packet completely I think it would benefit contesting.  But we'd
have to pretty much agree on the subject to create a rules change like
and there's not much chance of this group agreeing...

So, Jim, I like your ideas; but let's eliminate the ASSISTED category
my way.
Except not the K0HB way.  Let's outlaw ANY use of packet during
Let's outlaw ANY solicitation of contacts on another band during
contests. But
a new rule against super-check partial is of little interest to me.
It would be
kind of like adding a rule against using crutches in the 100 yard dash
in the
Olympics.  Guys who need them aren't in the running anyway.

----- Original Message -----
From: "KØHB" <k0hb at earthlink.net>
To: "James Neiger" <n6tj at sbcglobal.net>; <CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] STUFF

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Neiger" <n6tj at sbcglobal.net>
> > I marvel at those skilled in SO2R.  Maybe I'll be proficient by
the time I'm
> > 70 (soon).  Or not.  Meanwhile, please, let's leave these fellows
> > perhaps we can shut our mouths, open our minds, and learn.
> > category? Nah.  Special operators?  You bet they are.........
> >
> > Second topic.  Let's do away with ASSISTED.   Packet is here to
stay.  So
> > many are using it today, and claiming un-assisted, why should they
have this
> > 'special advantage'?  Let everyone use it, without penalty.
> I agree.  Let's do away with ASSISTED.  If you use packet you go
into the
> "multi-op" category.  Packet isn't a skill like SO2R, it's a crutch
> super-check-partial.
> 73, de Hans, K0HB
> RadioSport Minnesota -- http://www.W0AA.org
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list