[CQ-Contest] NAQP Revised Rules

[David Gilbert]

Not sure why this is so difficult to understand.

As I see it, the focus of NAQP has always been as a single op activity 
... low power and simple structure (I could list several facets of the 
contest that support that claim).  Packet pretty much disrupts that 
intent, so those who insist on using packet get relegated to a 
"secondary" multi-user category instead of adding another category to 
support an activity (packet) that the contest as originally configured 
probably preferred to avoid anyway.

You're trying to broaden the focus of this contest and make it like lots 
of others.  Most NAQP ops seem to prefer that it doesn't.  I'm not a 
huge fan of K0HB's incessant "a boy and his radio" mantra, but I think 
it applies pretty well in this case.  In my opinion, that's a major 
appeal of the contest.

Dave   AB7E




On 12/15/2016 6:31 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
>
>> The guys who started NAQP many years ago established rules that made 
>> it the somewhat unique set of contests that it is, and most 
>> participants like it the way it is. The statistics you posted 
>> yesterday obscured that fact by only looked at M2 data, without 
>> comparing those entries to single op.
>
> Right because M2 is the packet class.  The point being is that 75 
> percent of the people that are listed for M2 are not multiop 
> stations.  Thus why that data was chosen.
>
> Like I said if the intent was to not use packet then why is packet 
> allowed in M2?
>
> W0MU
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>