[CQ-Contest] K5GO speaks out for youth in contesting

[Paul O'Kane]

On 27/03/2016 07:37, David Gilbert wrote:

>
> You're entire reply essentially says that I'm talking apples and 
> oranges.  And you're exactly right.  But those apples compete for 
> attention with our oranges among youngsters, and the apples are going 
> to win because of the reasons I laid out.


David is right - we will never get back to the good old days,
if there ever was such a thing, of amateur radio.

Our numbers are going down because there is now a greater
range of new and interesting internet-based hobbies and
activities available to scientifically-minded youngsters.
There was a long period, 80 years or more, when "new" and
"interesting" applied to ham radio - but not any more.

> And it is exactly that radiosport is going to have to changeif it 
> intends to survive.

Change is good so long as you don't change amateur radio
into something that is internet-dependent rather than
amateur-band-RF-dependent.

>   Again I point to the demographics that clearly prove my point.  Deny 
> it if you want, but that's just more evidence of what's wrong.

There's nothing to deny - the demographics demonstrate
that ham radio is a legacy hobby and, as with any other
declining or legacy interest, numbers are bound to go
down.  But ham radio will not disappear, and it's our
responsibility to do what we can to keep numbers up.

It seems to me the only worldwide organisation that's
making a real effort is CWops - with its CW academy.
I'm not a member, but I know it's time I volunteered
as an academy tutor.

The internet is wonderful, but integration with the
internet (in terms of communications interdependence)
will do little to preserve ham radio. Perhaps we should
emphasise the differences between ham-band RF and the
internet? If you want to be different, get into ham
radio.  Do things the hard way, for its own sake.

Exclusivity need not be a negative characteristic.

73,
Paul EI5DI