[CQ-Contest] TO7A Comments, Data and Log Checking

[XV4Y (Yan)]

Hi,

If you write the rules only for "serious contester" with big unlimited stations, you will end with only 50-100 participants from 20-30 countries.
Not a very funny contest.
If you want the contest to be fun for everyone, you have to make several categories giving more chances to win a certificate or at least to rank fairly.

Let's take my very personal case.
XV is not very rare but still not common in contest days.
I admit that the possibility of winning "country" motivates me in making an entry to CQ WW, AA DX, ARRL 10m or IARU HF even when I have only few spare time.
Ok I'm doing only 100-200 QSOs, but those who have me in their log seem happy.

73,
Yan.
---
Yannick DEVOS - XV4Y
http://xv4y.radioclub.asia/
http://varc.radioclub.asia/

> Le 10 mai 2015 à 04:52, cq-contest-request at contesting.com a écrit :
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 7
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 07:50:47 +1000
> From: VK4TS Trent Sampson <vk4ts at outlook.com>
> To: "'Kelly Taylor'" <ve4xt at mymts.net>, 'Jos? Nunes CT1BOH'
> 	<ct1boh at gmail.com>,	"'George via CQ-Contest'"
> 	<cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Cc: 'Stan Stockton' <wa5rtg at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A Comments, Data and Log Checking
> Message-ID: <BAY180-DS6B3D67C6B88A90A0D7914F2DD0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Totally agree Kelly,
> 
> Thank god this is not a hanging jury. 
> 
> Presumption of guilt on the background of circumstantial evidence - or
> worse: "This cannot be right because I cannot do it" is a terrible result
> all round for contesting. 
> 
> Contesters must stick by the old chestnut - Abide by the laws and
> regulations that is signed with every contest log. 
> 
> When we can no longer trust each other to do this then the methods of
> adjudication must be harsher, sadly, we will see more of this in the future.
> 
> 
> In reality is it time for the removal of the Classic SOAB class and meld
> into SOAB(Assisted) ? 
> 
> We as a hobby are supposed to be technologists and yet the very thought of
> removing a category starts flame wars - because we have always done it that
> way. 
> 
> When you first sat the ham exam it was the entry into a new area that was
> exciting and something that you felt you would learn and grow from, saldy as
> we as a group are getting older the very thoughts of allowing technological
> advantage in any form is being squashed by contest committee's and the
> contest community. 
> 
> For example - CQWPX - changing the rules to not allow a second multiplier
> radio in Multi Single to Single radio only - why ? Because some people
> worked out how to be very good at running multipliers on Rig 2. 
> 
> This is counterproductive to setting up a great station - to hear of people
> not wanting SO2R is another disappointing thread because this is tried and
> proven technology. Get with the times fellows it's been around for years. 
> 
> I am surprised that we don?t have to use a FT101 Yaesu with straight keys
> and paper logs if some back ward thinking people had their way. 
> 
> Are we stifling competition and competitor advantage purely for no other
> reason other than jealousy ? 
> 
> I hope not 
> 
> 73 
> 
> Trent VK4TS