[CQ-Contest] Suggestion for NAQP

[Hank Greeb]

Thanks Al:

I figured I'd write the note in CQ-Contest to get the idea into the 
contesting community.  I wrote the following to WA7BNM

As you can see from the message below, I think we Gringos are doing our 
southern friends a disservice by lumping them all together into one 
"bunch".  At least the ARRL has recognized them in the 10 metre contest 
- and it was reported after the recent 10M contest that over 2/3 of the 
"states" within Mexico were represented in the submitted logs.

Perhaps it's time for the folks who "run" the NCJ contests to seriously 
consider our XE friends and their "states" as multipliers?  BTW, who 
sets the rules for the NAQP? Are you one of these high honchos?  We make 
an exception for the Non-North American "State" of Hawaii - and we allow 
Yukon, NWT and Nunavut in Canada, each with a handful of hams, count as 
multipliers, why not the 31 estados in Mexico?

If this has been discussed within the NAQP rules committee, in 
conjunction with representatives of the Federacion Mexicana de Radio 
Experimentadores - that's great!  Otherwise, perhaps my 
question/suggestion should be considered?

73 de n8xx Hg

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Suggestion for NAQP
Date: 	Tue, 11 Jan 2011 20:15:54 -0500
From: 	Hank Greeb <n8xx at arrl.org>
To: 	cwnaqpmgr at ncjweb.com


Hi Bruce:

Have the folks who run NAQP thought of including the states within 
Mexico as multipliers? Mexico has 30 "states" and 1 "federal district" - 
seems similar to the States in the united States and the Federal 
District of Columbia.

Mexico has 130 million people, over a third of the population of the 
U.S., and about 5 times the population of Canada, where the provinces 
count for multipliers.  I understand that Canada was completely within 
ARRL until a few years ago when the Radio Amateurs of Canada broke off, 
so that's the reason for including the provinces as multipliers, but it 
seems that the 2nd largest country in North America should receive 
similar consideration.

73 de n8xx Hg


On 1/11/2011 7:08 PM, aldewey at aol.com wrote:
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:02:56 -0500 (EST)
> From:aldewey at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Question about NAQP
> To:cq-contest at contesting.com
>
> Hank;
>
> No - the states within Mexico do not count as seperate multipliers in NAQP.
>
> If you have other questions about NAQP, my recommendation is that you first check the rules
> at:http://www.ncjweb.com/naqprules.php
>
> If that is not clear, contact the Contest Manager at:cwnaqpmgr at ncjweb.com  or drop me a line both
> off the reflector.
>
> 73,
>
> Al, K0AD
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hank Greeb<n8xx at arrl.org>
> To: cq-contest<cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tue, Jan 11, 2011 4:37 pm
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Question about NAQP
>
> Do states within Mexico count as multipliers in NAQP, similar to the Multipliers in the ARRL 10 metre contest?  I only worked one station from Mexico, and he sent "MEX" for his location,   That could be an abbreviation for the "Mexico State" within the Country of Mexico, or could be generic abbreviation for the country.    Had I worked more stations, with differing prefixes, it might have been obvious.  I note that NCJ - which is somehow under the umbrella of ARRL, is the sponsor of the NAQP events, but don't know who to contact directly with the question.  Besides, some other newbie might have the same question.
>
> But, if I'm out of order, or if it's "obvious to one trained in the art"
> just call me a newbie or a LID.
>
> 73 de n8xx Hg
>
> p.s. It seems that, for the most part, RTTY and CW got along quite well
> last weekend.  Congrats to all for observing the "gentlemen's"
> bboundaries for the modes.