[CQ-Contest] Stimulating Participation

[Pete Smith]

At 12:41 PM 11/30/2004, Warren C. Stankiewicz wrote:
>I've got to disagree with Hans on this one. The only measurable metric on
>activity is how many logs are submitted. Anything else ("...gee, there were
>a lot of signals on the bands...") is heresay, unmeasurable, and not
>quantifiable.
>
>We need solutions which can prove quantifiable results, and a plan which
>will produce those results. Otherwise, there's no real point to sponsoship
>at all, considering the data the ARRL has showing us to be a tiny minority
>of the ham population at large.
>
>Arguments such as we spend more on our stations, have greater equity and
>interest in the hobby, are advancing the state of the art, etc, have no
>pursuasive value without concrete, verifiable statistics to back them up.


Contest sponsors have the means at hand to track raw activity.  The 
log-checking software can produce lists of call-signs appearing in anyone's 
log, and even allowing for a fair number of busts, a consistent metric 
could be developed (assuming that the percentage of busts didn't change 
appreciably over time).  This could even be cleaned up by cross-checking 
with databases to get rid of the bad calls, sorted by country (to produce 
information on national or continental trends of activity), etc.  There's a 
lot of very interesting and relevant information out there for the massaging.

73, Pete N4ZR