[CQ-Contest] Non-assisted & Assisted
Barry
w2up at comcast.net
Fri Jan 25 18:41:40 EST 2013
So you and the others who aren't happy should vote him out next election.
Barry W2UP
On 1/25/2013 14:51, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
>
> My ARRL Director is totally unresponsive as far as I can tell - and
> I'm far from the only Roanoke ARRL member who says so.
>
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
> http://reversebeacon.net,
> blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
> For spots, please go to your favorite
> ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.
>
> On 1/25/2013 4:13 PM, Rick Lindquist, WW1ME wrote:
>>
>> No, but you now have asked Sean regarding board action on the
>> proposed rules change, and he's a person who should know.
>>
>> I was simply explaining how League governance typically works, since
>> you had asked "Why it requires a decision at that level." In my
>> experience the board has voted by e-mail or teleconference on a few
>> occasions, but this is the exception, and that wasn't the question
>> you raised anyway. Your ARRL director or perhaps Pres Craigie or EVP
>> Dave Sumner can address this governance issue far better than I could.
>>
>> But, I don't have a dog in this hunt.
>>
>> 73, Rick, WW1ME
>>
>> *From:*Pete Smith N4ZR [mailto:n4zr at contesting.com]
>> *Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2013 3:54 PM
>> *To:* Rick Lindquist, WW1ME
>> *Cc:* CQ Contest; Kutzko, Sean, KX9X
>> *Subject:* Re: [CQ-Contest] Non-assisted & Assisted
>>
>> Rick, I'm well aware of that, which is why I contacted Directors who
>> contest, to try to get the issue before the Board. My question really
>> goes to why the question has to wait for a semi-annual Board meeting,
>> when a Board committee could vote on such minor matters by e-mail "as
>> needed." You seem to be well patched in - do you know what they
>> decided, if anything?
>>
>> On second thought, I'm copying Sean - he should know.
>>
>> 73, Pete N4ZR
>> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
>> http://reversebeacon.net,
>> blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
>> For spots, please go to your favorite
>> ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.
>>
>> On 1/25/2013 12:00 PM, Rick Lindquist, WW1ME wrote:
>>
>> Pete, the CAC is what it says - "advisory." It's also comprised of
>>
>> volunteers. The CAC reports its findings and recommendations to
>> the Board of
>>
>> Directors, and the board decides (or not). This puts the
>> decision-making in
>>
>> the hands of individuals who have been elected by the ARRL
>> membership.
>>
>>
>> 73, Rick, WW1ME
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On
>> Behalf Of
>>
>> Pete Smith N4ZR
>>
>> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:32 AM
>>
>> To:cq-contest at contesting.com <mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Non-assisted & Assisted
>>
>>
>> What Rich says is correct. I would just add that the ARRL 10 and
>> 160
>>
>> contests are severely anachronistic in this respect. Nobody is
>> suggesting
>>
>> that assistance be allowed for "pure" single-ops, but surely
>> there should be
>>
>> a SOA category in these contests. That there is not dates back to
>> the
>>
>> earliest days of DX clusters. To my knowledge, nobody has
>> advanced a reason
>>
>> for keeping the status quo.
>>
>>
>> I have been in correspondence with the CAC and various directors
>> about this,
>>
>> and one told me that action might be taken in the January ARRL Board
>>
>> meeting, which has just taken place. Why it requires a decision
>> at that
>>
>> level is beyond me, but that's what we have. Now waiting for
>> detailed
>>
>> minutes to learn what, if anything, was done.
>>
>>
>> 73, Pete N4ZR
>>
>> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
>>
>> http://reversebeacon.net,
>>
>> blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
>>
>> For spots, please go to your favorite
>>
>> ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.
>>
>>
>> On 1/25/2013 8:51 AM, Richard DiDonna NN3W wrote:
>>
>> Usually if it says nothing, the assumption is that you must
>> classify
>>
>> yourself as multi-single as the single operator rules have
>> language about
>>
>> the -operator- doing all of the activity.
>>
>>
>> ARRL 160 and ARRL 10 do not have separate assisted categories -
>>
>> necessitating that assisted ops enter as multi single entries.
>>
>>
>> 73 Rich NN3W
>>
>>
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone
>>
>>
>> ----- Reply message -----
>>
>> From:Ktfrog007 at aol.com <mailto:Ktfrog007 at aol.com>
>>
>> Date: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 7:30 am
>>
>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Non-assisted & Assisted
>>
>> To:<cq-contest at contesting.com>
>> <mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com>
>>
>>
>> If a contest's rules say nothing about Assisted operation,
>> does that
>>
>> mean it's allowed without restriction?
>>
>>
>> Note that Single-Op has no uniform definition. For example,
>> in the
>>
>> ARRL RTTY Roundup, Single-Ops cannot be Assisted, while in
>> the CQ WPX
>>
>> RTTY everyone can operate Assisted.
>>
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Kermit (Ken) AB1J
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
>>
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
>>
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto: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
>
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list