[CQ-Contest] Xtreme category, catch 22

[Julius Fazekas]

Hmmm... SIM or WII Amateur Radio, there's probably a place for that too. Just as with simulated flight, poker, baseball.

Is it the same thing as the "real" thing, no. Can it be modeled to be a close approximation? Probably... Build it and they will come.

I can see a point variation based on where you make the "QSO", via the internet, satellite, actually "on the air". Would it be popular? Who knows?!

The "Extreme Category", 15 days to submit your log, no more paper logs... Who would have thunk it five years ago? ;o)

Change is the only constant.

Enjoy,

Julius

Julius Fazekas
N2WN

Tennessee Contest Group
http://www.k4ro.net/tcg/index.html

Tennessee QSO Party: Sunday, 6 Sept 2009
http://www.tnqp.org/

Elecraft K2/100 #4455
Elecraft K3/100 #366


--- On Tue, 6/16/09, Paul O'Kane <pokane at ei5di.com> wrote:

> From: Paul O'Kane <pokane at ei5di.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Xtreme category, catch 22
> To: CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> Date: Tuesday, June 16, 2009, 10:52 AM
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Julius Fazekas" <phriendly1 at yahoo.com>
> 
> ...
> 
> > The Extreme category is a good thing... It may open
> new
> > techniques up to everyone. It is a logical progression
> in
> > our hobby.
> 
> New techniques and technologies are always welcome.
> When they serve to replace RF, however, the notion of
> a "QSO" has to change.  If all possible technology
> changes are accepted, contesting will change into
> something indistinguishable from internet gaming
> (thanks 6W1RY).
> 
> The issue is simply stated, but harder to resolve - 
> "When is a contest QSO not a QSO?"  Without
> agreement,
> the arguments about new categories and technologies
> will be never-ending.
> 
> IMHO, a good starting point is for QSOs to be valid
> only when they are acceptable for DXCC awards.
> 
> That raises two questions.
> 
>   1. Will the DXCC Committee offer a definition of
>      a QSO?  Perhaps there will be
> more than one
>      class of QSO, with separate
> definitions.
> 
>   2. Will the contesting community abide by the DXCC
>      definition(s) when framing rules
> and categories?
> 
> If the answer to either question is "No", we will
> remain in the Wild West era of contesting.
> 
> If the answer to both questions is "Yes", ARRL,
> CQ and other interested parties need to draft
> the definitions.
> 
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>