[CQ-Contest] Feb 04 QST op-ed article

[Mike Gilmer]

I'm not sure what the "standard responses" are; certainly there are
"standard" complaints to which, eventually, will come standard responses.
Contest-free zones certainly qualify as a "standard" desire by
non-contesters.

I generally view attempts to reduce the bandwidth available to contesters as
insulting.  I understand the desire - who wouldn't want more room for the
favorite activity, whatever it is?  However, they suggest that the several
dozen (potential) QSOs occurring at a given time on a given band by
non-contest operators (nets, rag chews, etc.) are somehow more valuable than
(and should therefore be given special status over) the (potential) hundreds
of (albeit short) QSOs that contesters are trying to make.

If there are 50 casual operators and 250 contesters vying for the same
200kHz, why should contesters be expected to willingly "give up" half the
available space?

In addition, there are only a few weekends a year in which contesters are
(or come close to)  filling up the phone bands so the non-contesters have
most weekends to themselves.

With all that said, the contentious nature of the phone bands (both during
and outside of contests) causes many (not just contesters) to operate there
only casually, or avoid them totally.  No wonder!

Mike N2MG

N5OT wrote:

> KI9A steered us toward the February Op-Ed in QST proposing phone contest
> subbands.  I read it and the author seems to be about as fair and balanced
> as possible given the volatility of the topic.
>
> So are all you phone guys out there giving us a bad name or what?  As the
> author correctly observes "CW operators are a little more savvy about such
> things" - but he is, of course, missing a couple key points:
>
> 1. CW signals are narrower than phone signals.
>
> 2. We seem to have enough room for our operations without taking up the
> entire CW subband (although in the good old days domestic contest CW never
> strayed below 25, so activity has increased).
>
> So help me out here (since I am not a real serious phone contester) have
> phone contests gotten to the point where the contest requires all of the
> entire phone subbands?
>
> Or is the guy who is claiming that in QST just not shooting straight?
>
> Why NOT limit contests on 20M to below 14.297?
>
> Please don't reply stating all the standard responses we hear all the time
> when somebody curses phone contests.  I am NOT the enemy, and I
> already know
> the arguments.  I wasn't born yesterday.
>
> Mark, N5OT
>