[CQ-Contest] ARRL Rookie Contest

[Zack Widup]

I see no reason not to experiment with new contests with new rules.
Remember when the Sprints first came out?

I am curious how many on this reflector who have been commenting on
the rules for the Rookie Roundup will actually participate in it. I
will probably forego the Phone and RTTY weekends but may get in on the
CW part of the contest (just to be nostalgic about the old Novice
Roundup).
:-)

73, Zack W9SZ


On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Edward Swynar <gswynar at durham.net> wrote:
> Interesting points, all...
>
> My personal observation on all this...? If the Ham population roughly
> follows general demographics, here in Canada some 70+% of us have computers,
> or access to the internet. That means that about 30% still do not, and go
> about life "...the old fashioned way", i.e. communicating via the telephone,
> paying bills in person or via snail-mail, etc.
>
> To creat a system---any system---whereby access is "exclusionary" is wrong.
> For maximum success & impact, one must appeal to the lowest common
> denominator---always.
>
> Can you just imagine the howls that would arise if they held an election
> someplace, & said that only votes cast via computer would be eligible...?
> That would be elitist AND exclusuionary, both, and no different than
> excluding Ham radio contest entries via the traditional "..paper route."
>
> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>
>
> *********************************
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nate Bargmann" <n0nb at n0nb.us>
> To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2010 7:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL Rookie Contest
>
>
>> * On 2010 13 Feb 21:48 -0600, Idle-Tyme wrote:
>> > I've been cob=ntesting for since 75,
>> >
>> > and the last years WI QSO Party was my first entry using a computer to
>> > log and submit my entry.
>>
>> And I've been using a computer logger of some sort for every contesting
>> event ever since my second Field Day participation in 1987.  What's
>> your point?
>>
>> > Now here is someone that has been contesting for a LONG time and with
>> > that rule, i would have been disqyualified,  for it took me a LOT longer
>> > to figure out how to make the cabrillo log , and send it to the correct
>> > location.
>>
>> We should not straight-jacket the new contest based on our veteran
>> issues.  I say that we should allow this contest to evolve based on the
>> feedback received from the participants and those who found it
>> difficult to participate.  My guess is that some changes will be made
>> before the second running of this event.  If the submission deadline
>> proves to be too short, it will be lengthened.  If Internet logging
>> proves too ornerous, it will be modified, and so on.  I recognize that
>> this is an event that is not aimed at me, so what I want in a contest
>> isn't important here.
>>
>> Let's allow the hams this event is designed for determine if the rules
>> and format are appropriate for their event.  If and when requested, we
>> can provide our feedback as well, but I'm optimistic enough to not
>> pronounce it DOA before it ever has a chance.
>>
>> 73, de Nate >>
>>
>> --
>>
>> "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
>> possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
>>
>> Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://n0nb.us/index.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>