[CQ-Contest] Interesting Youth In Ham Radio (was Digest)
MARK BAILEY
kd4d at comcast.net
Wed Nov 15 13:12:16 EST 2017
Hi Mike:
Treating QSOs from "unconnected" stations differently would penalize the unconnected stations who were in the single operator category. I still don't see why rules for the new "internet-connected" events can't be crafted to allow for single operator categories. Also, I did not get the impression Ward was proposing a separate "contest within a contest" - he appeared to be proposing changing the CQWW rules.
"If a QSO isn't validated because the station isn't online, give it one point or something."
Mark
> On November 15, 2017 at 12:18 PM W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com> wrote:
>
>
> Nobody says you have to play to connected game. Not all contests are
> for everyone. This idea has been brought up before but doesn't seem to
> get much traction. If you want to play in the N0AX World Wide these are
> the rules. Just like every other contest. It would probably start out
> as a niche contest and grow exponentially or fall flat. Why do we have
> to placate those that don't want to abide by these special rules.
> Either get on the net or not. If you don't use the net then this one is
> not for you. Just like many other contests. Pick the ones you like.
>
> W0MU
>
>
> On 11/15/2017 8:26 AM, MARK BAILEY wrote:
> > Hi Ward:
> >
> >
> > Clearly, our game is going to become more connected and real-time. I see no reason, however, that this new world cannot co-exist with the traditional single operator categories (WRTC-like for instance). What I would like to see considered is making sure that the new world doesn't require everyone to be connected and integrated - interoperate with a game where the "radio" people can play.
> >
> >
> > I was particularly struck by, and disagree with, the following:
> >
> >
> > "So everybody has to be
> > connected - so what - make a new CWAC overlay to CQ WW called the
> > Internet WW and run everybody's totals there. If a QSO isn't validated
> > because the station isn't online, give it one point or something."
> >
> >
> > I think this new game, which is very rapidly taking over the Assisted and Multi-operator categories, can easily coexist with the traditional single operator game that some of us still enjoy playing! :-)
> >
> >
> > 73,
> >
> >
> > Mark, KD4D
> >
> >
> >> On November 15, 2017 at 12:31 AM Ward Silver wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I like where this thread has gone and picked out a few of the bits I
> >> thought most thought-provoking. N3BB's earlier comments were of
> >> interest, as well. Perhaps I could add a couple of thoughts and maybe
> >> RM2D will re-appear with some thoughts about younger contesters, as well.
> >>
> >> My "sales pitch" is usually some variation on "you can hear the world
> >> turning" on HF. This immediately provokes questions and starts any
> >> number of stories. Most people are completely unaware of the
> >> ionosphere, solar weather beyond the occasional sensationalized news
> >> item about how we're all going to die from a solar flare, and the idea
> >> that things change every day and every hour. This at least starts a
> >> conversation which can lead anywhere the interest goes.
> >>
> >> Radiosport is also missing two crucial elements to hold the interest of
> >> anyone accustomed to being online: visualization and real-time
> >> interaction. At the moment, contesting is like submarine racing -
> >> awfully interesting to whoever is in the submarines but not of much
> >> interest to anyone else. All the amazing stuff we imagine during the
> >> contest - openings, pileups, grey line, angle of arrival, rate, strategy
> >> * they're all between our ears and very little is displayed visually.
> >>
> >> Some progress is being made - like with the waterfall display - but
> >> there is so much data we could overlay onto various presentations.
> >> People are visual today and we need to make what we do a little more
> >> visual. I'm not saying turn it into a video game - just think up ways
> >> to make the core functions of what we find so exciting something to see
> >> as well as hear and imagine.
> >>
> >> Real-time interaction (meaning scoring) is the other part. The
> >> real-time scoreboards are a step or two in the right direction - more of
> >> us need to be using them and we need more tools for comparing, tracking,
> >> ranking, analyzing scores and the breakdown data. The underlying
> >> mechanism of reporting score data to a common processor seems to be
> >> solved. Why not send QSO data along with the score? Collect the QSOs
> >> and send them to a cross-checking validation engine that runs until the
> >> contest is over. (gross oversimplification) Then the final scores are
> >> published in minutes, not weeks or months. So everybody has to be
> >> connected - so what - make a new CWAC overlay to CQ WW called the
> >> Internet WW and run everybody's totals there. If a QSO isn't validated
> >> because the station isn't online, give it one point or something. Or
> >> make a new contest with everybody online - that's where our target
> >> audience is anyway. We can't wait until the last non-online holdout
> >> gives in.
> >>
> >> Those are tonight's ideas.
> >>
> >> 73, Ward N0AX
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> But if the sales pitch for amateur radio is "hey look how fascinating
> >> >> ionospheric HF propagation is compared to big budget VHF/UHF line of sight
> >> >> communications" I think it's a very easy pitch to make.
> >> >>
> >> >> = = =
> >> >>
> >> >> For the young person who has $100 and is
> >> >> looking to invest in something with a high probability of fun, how does
> >> >> amateur radio stack up? How much fun would it be for any of us with a $100
> >> >> station budget?
> >> >>
> >> >> = = =
> >> >>
> >> >> I've found contesters to be among the most young-at-heart people I've ever
> >> >> met. I've been shocked a few times to discover that a contester I had
> >> >> operated with was 10+ years older than I'd realized. Contesting truly may
> >> >> be the fountain of youth. Maybe it's the combination of a spirit that does
> >> >> not decline with age and the strategic insight that only gets stronger with
> >> >> experience.
> >> >>
> >> >> = = =
> >> >>
> >> >> ...they are interested in integrated stations (computer &
> >> >> radio) with automation coming quickly as the world that they are used to,
> >> >> this is a bit of a challenge for some of our mentors, who want to start
> >> >> from the theory of discrete components and work toward crystal radios, then
> >> >> onto discrete components, then ...
> >> >>
> >> >> = = =
> >> >>
> >> >> I believe that both approaches will appeal to different constituencies;
> >> >> however, the former approach of starting with the integrated station and
> >> >> then dealing into the theory, seems to be more effective on a broader base.
> >> >>
> >> >> My take away is that there is no one single bullet and that we will need
> >> >> multiple approaches; however, from my observation, if not a statistically
> >> >> significant sample, is that this approach in getting them online then work
> >> >> to fill out operational and theoretical competence has offered an appeal to
> >> >> a broader set of students that we have the privilege to interact and offer
> >> >> a road to hamdom....
> >> >>
> >> >> = = =
> >> >>
> >> >> Amateurs have spent decades building the foundations of radio, it's time to
> >> >> help the new crowd take those foundations and build something of their own
> >> >> on top of it.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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