[CQ-Contest] Unassisted, SK?

Radio K0HB kzerohb at gmail.com
Mon Dec 15 10:08:45 EST 2014


Steve, nobody has protested SOA. 


The protest (what you label as "whining") is against the selection decision to lump SO and SOA in the same qualification bucket.




73, de Hans, K0HB/K7

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Steve Lott <lottsphoto at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hans,
> Did I really say I applaud them for no longer allowing just a boy and his
> radio as a category, no I did not.
> Seems many of you in this thread are looking at it one way, as they did
> this to make everyone equal with the cheaters etc etc
> or now they eliminated the category you have always used,
> without thought that many have wanted the new category of single op assisted
> and many have had to just choose a category that penalized them self
> because there was no SOA
> by entering Multi OP
> Maybe some narrow minded OPS thought well it's not my fault they don't
> offer SOA
> so they entered SO and still operated Assisted, we all know that is
> cheating but some narrow minds, did not get that.
> I disagree with those that took that view, as that is simple - it was
> cheating
> One does not enter a Stock category in car racing with a modified car that
> is not stock.
> I stated that I applaud the DARC for embracing the change and allowing SOA
> during qualification.......
> For years many of us,
> we had to choose Multi-Op in many contest
> even if it was just us our radio our computer and heaven forbid us using
> skimmer or other spotting assistance - we entered Multi-OP
> In many contest today the contest sponsors are embracing SOA
> adding it as a defined category or even SO Unlimited
> we have seen this trend for several years now and the trend is
> sponsors are seeing more activity in these new categories
> So why should we fault The sponsor of IARU championship 2018
> for embracing this change, oh because they decided to eliminate just a boy
> and his radio (SO)
> Oh my, now you have a category that is not there for you and you will need
> to make some choices
> on how you proceed - the choice is yours, do you embrace the changes or do
> whine about it ?
> Cheers!
> steve
> KG5VK
> http://www.KG5VK.com
> My Ham Radio Friends
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Radio K0HB <kzerohb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Really?  Applaud?
>>
>> You applaud the end of solo contesting?  That "just a boy and his radio"
>> cannot continue to independently compete as a category?
>>
>> Why does that pending extinction draw your enthusiastic approval?
>>
>> 73, de Hans, K0HB/K7
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 3:49 AM, Steve Lott <lottsphoto at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  I applaud their change !
>>>
>>> cheers!
>>> steve
>>> KG5VK
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.KG5VK.com
>>> My Ham Radio Friends
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Radio K0HB <kzerohb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> WRTC qualification should not be about social engineering and "incentive
>>>> for change".  It should be about "selecting the most skilled".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 73, de Hans, K0HB/K7
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 7:26 AM, Oliver Sweningsen <w6nv at pacbell.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Some have said that in the past, the 'best' operators 'wanted' to
>>>> compete in
>>>> > the unassisted category.
>>>> >
>>>> > The WRTC qualification process will provide the incentive for change.
>>>> Two
>>>> > Bob Dylan quotes come to mind: "Yesterday's just a memory, tomorrow is
>>>> never
>>>> > what it's supposed to be."  And, "You don't need a weatherman to know
>>>> which
>>>> > way the wind blows."
>>>> >
>>>> > Check the scores and, follow the leader(s).
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > 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
>>>>
>>>
>>


More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list