[CQ-Contest] AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CQ CONTEST COMMITTEE

[Radio K0HB]

If in fact those using the cluster will compete in the same category as 
"pure" single operators, then the contest is cancelled as far as I'm 
concerned.

73, de Hans, K0HB
"Just a boy and his radio"

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jim Neiger" <n6tj at sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 8:41 PM
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CQ CONTEST COMMITTEE

>
>
>
> AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CQ CONTEST COMMITTEE, and K1EA, K1AR, K1DG, N2AA, 
> N2NC, N2NT, KR2Q, N3ED, K3ZO, KM3T, W3ZZ, N5KO, W5OV, N6AA, N6TR, N6TW, 
> N8BJQ, N9RV, W0YK, W0UN, CT1BOH, DJ6QT, DL6RAI, EA3DU, F6BEE, G3SXW, 
> JE1CKA, OH2BH, OH2KI, OH2MM, PY5EG, S50A, UA9BA, VE3EJ, VA7RR
>
>                     from: Jim Neiger  N6TJ
>
> subject: "The winds of change are a blowin' or The day that contesting 
> died"
>
> 1.  QUESTION:  Will the CQ CONTEST COMMITTEE open its closed discussions 
> of the fate of Single Operator categories to the public or will we first 
> learn of them when the rules are changed?
>
> 2.  PREMISE:  The CQ CONTEST log checkers cannot efficiently or accurately 
> ascertain as to whether anyone is cheating by the use of packet, claiming 
> to be Single Operator, but when really operating Single Operator - 
> Assisted.
>
> 3.  WHAT THE CQ CONTEST COMMITTEE IS CONSIDERING:  Given (2), above, 
> eliminate the Single Operator category, and everyone is then Single 
> Operator - Assisted.
>
>
> My opinions / comments:
>
> (1) Needless to say, given (3) above, to be competitive all must then use 
> packet, or skimmers, or...................?
>
> (2) Can I assume that not everyone desires to use packet or skimmers?
>
> (3) Of course, major crutches like packet and skimmers will make all past 
> records null and void.  Single Operator - Assisted multiplier totals will 
> soon rival those of the Multi-multi submittals.
>
> (4) Packet is used and enjoyed by many. From the DX-end, one can always 
> tell when they've just been spotted; the rate really takes off.  Great 
> fun.  Many opinions have been stated about the pros/cons/desires of using 
> packet.  But at the end of the day, no matter how you slice it, packet, 
> skimmers, and the like, is NOT DXing, represents minimal skills, and is 
> more like the proverbial 'shooting fish in a barrel'.  Great competition. 
> NOT.
>
> (5) QUESTION:  Who are these guys that are the members of the CQ CONTEST 
> COMMITTEE and hold our collective fate in their hands?  Hard working, 
> volunteer log checkers, for sure.  But does anyone remember voting them 
> into office?  Who gave them the power to VOTE on these matters of such 
> great importance to us all?  For those who extol the merits of our 
> democratic way of life, no matter how pathetic our elected officials at 
> times may be, we at least had the opportunity to vote them in, or out, of 
> office.
>
> TO SUMMARIZE:  I have been operating CQ contests since 1955.  Many.  Won a 
> couple, lost a bunch.  Needless to say, when I resigned from the CQ 
> CONTEST COMMITTEE in 1978, my power to vote was gone.  All I can do now is 
> plea: open up your deliberations and discussions on these matters.  Let 
> the all of us know who's minds we need to change.  What have you got to 
> hide?  Please do not make this the death of my contesting career, as it 
> most certainly will.  Thank you.
>
> s/ Jim Neiger   N6TJ
>
> 17 January 2010
>
>