[CQ-Contest] 1 pointers for CQWW

[Steve.Root@culligan.com]

I couldn't agree with you more, Kelly.

73 Steve K0SR


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt at mts.net>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>; "Gary Sutcliffe" <w9xt at unifiedmicro.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 2:03 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 1 pointers for CQWW


> Hi all,
>
> Gary's point is well taken, but I would counter that the frequencies we
use
> are there for the good of all amateurs, not just contesters, even during a
> contest weekend.
>
> The casual guy just "trying to help out" is probably also just trying to
> make the best of, in some folks' opinion, a bad situation: a band chock
full
> of contesters and nobody else to work. So he tries to work a few guys just
> for the sake of getting on the air.
>
> We have to admit that we have a large public relations problem: enough
> people already hate contests because they disrupt their weekend enjoyment
of
> radio. If we're going to do this, even if we are as polite as possible in
> explaining that it's a DX contest, it is NOT going to help.
>
> For the good of contesting, I would suggest we just hold our nose and
> swallow gracefully the zero pointers. How many zero point callers do you
get
> when your DX rate is high? How many come when you've hit a lull in CQing?
If
> it comes on a CQ when you would not have worked a DX anyway, what's the
> cost?
>
> Heck, even in ARRL DX, I just work the guy, say 73 and move on. It's
> simpler, faster and more gracious than trying to explain the intricacies
of
> the contest.
>
> 73, kelly
> ve4xt
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary Sutcliffe" <w9xt at unifiedmicro.com>
> To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 10:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 1 pointers for CQWW
>
>
> > At 07:43 AM 11/29/2005, Cqtestk4xs at aol.com wrote:
> > >3. The casual day to day operator really does not have any conception
of
> the
> > >rules of the contest and thinks he is truly helping out...that meaning
> the
> > >stateside callers passing out qso's.......is it time to step up to the
> > >plate and
> > >allow 1 point per qso for contacts within one's country??
> > >NQ4I
> >
> > I've always felt a bit embarrassed calling a US station to get the W
> > multiplier, knowing it is usually a big gun calling CQ (thanks K9NS for
> the
> > double mult on 10!) and this is just a waste of time for them.
> >
> > That being said, if filling the log with zero point contacts is
> > really  that much of a problem it would be better to just not allow you
to
> > get credit for your own country. It would mean a few less multipliers
but
> > preserve the flavor of CQWW by leaving it as a DX contest.
> >
> > CQers would still get a few calls by the casual operator who does not
know
> > the rules. Just thanking them for the call but briefly explaining you
can
> > only work DX will keep most of them from tuning up the band and working
> > everyone they hear.
> >
> >
> > Gary Sutcliffe  W9XT
> > Unified Microsystems
> > w9xt at unifiedmicro.com
> > www.unifiedmicro.com
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest