[CQ-Contest] NAQP Rules and the District of Columbia

[Eric Rosenberg]

Mal,

To reiterate my response to K4IK,

"As I've previously written, my desire/request is for the NAQP contests 
ONLY.   WAS is completely different, an award, not a contest. It is not 
germane to this discussion.

"Geographic locators in the ARRL Sweepstakes are ARRL Sections.  The 
District of Columbia is part of an ARRL Section (Maryland-DC), and 
unless/until it is a separate ARRL Section, should not be accounted for 
separately.

How much more simply can I state this?

Thanks for your comments,

Eric W3DQ
Washington, DC

At 11:17 PM 5/31/2005 +0000, N7MAL wrote:

>I think we need to slow this bus down a little. Whether or not you 
>want DC, as a section, will become mute if it is allowed in even one 
>contest, it will become a mult in every contest. Our domestic contests 
>have finally stabilized. We were adding mults to our domestic 
>contests, year after year for several years, creating problems for 
>everyone from the contest sponsors to the software writers on down to 
>the participants.
>As has already been suggested why not every Indian reservation, after 
>all they have cigarette stores, gaming casinos, and are considered 
>sovereign.
>IMHO we need to quickly, and gently, put the lid back on this can of 
>worms.
>73
>
>MAL             N7MAL
>BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
><http://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htm>http://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htm 
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:wd3q at starpower.net>Eric Rosenberg
>To: <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 18:05
>Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Rules and the District of Columbia
>
>Thanks to those who have taken the time to reply to my email regarding 
>
>the multiplier status of the District of Columbia in the various 
>NAQPs.
>The dialog has been stimulating, interesting, and somewhat 
>disappointing.
>That notwithstanding, it's time to move on to the next level.
>
>One respondent suggested:
>
>"Maybe your post to CQ Contest should be revised to:
>
>    I would like the NAQP to add DC as a multiplier."
>
>That's been my issue from the start.  I have no interest in having the 
>
>District become an ARRL Section, nor have the District be counted as a 
>DX
>entity.
>
>My interest is that for this series of contests ONLY, where it seems 
>that
>every other US governed entity, be it a state or other territorial 
>body,
>has a separate identity, the District of Columbia be treated as a
>separate entity, too.
>
>As there appears to be no official process for submitting this 
>request, I
>have taken the liberty to air this publicly.  I accept the notion that 
>
>the governing body of the NAQPs may not want to modify the rules.  If
>that's the case, I would like to know why, and too, if there is any
>recourse or method to appeal their decision.  I don't think that's 
>asking
>too much.
>
>One correspondent made the comment that he doesn't enter a contest
>because he's a rare multiplier, rather that they're fun.  While I
>wholeheartedly agree that my main criteria for participation in any 
>given
>activity is that it must be fun, being treated equally certainly adds 
>to
>the fun factor.  Those of us who live and/or work here in the District 
>do
>try and drum up activity and local competition, and have, as a result, 
>
>seen stations previously dormant come back to life. Giving folks 
>another
>positive reason to enter a given contest does increase activity, which 
>is
>something I believe we in the contesting community want (it was 
>certainly
>mentioned at the 2005 Dayton Contest Dinner).  That increased activity 
>
>and inherent competition adds to the fun!
>
>Finally, and to reiterate the comment above, I would like the NAQP to 
>add
>DC as a multiplier.  How do we go about this?
>
>Thank you to those who've sent me comments on this issue. As I've
>discovered over the years, the contesting community is both passionate 
>
>and articulate... and certainly willing to speak it's mind!
>
>73,
>Eric W3DQ
>Washington, DC
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
><mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.3.3 - Release Date: 5/31/2005


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.3.3 - Release Date: 5/31/2005