[UK-CONTEST] April 2007 Radcom letters

[Lee Volante]

Hi folks,

If we are going to be writing letters, let's try to think about how the 
completely neutral (disinterested?) third party will feel, or how the 
anti-contester would respond to them.  If we defend contesting too 
rigourously, we could risk looking like a vocal minority with biased views - 
i.e. exactly same as those who have written in decrying contesting. We need 
to rise above this.

Yes, many contesters are highly motivated, technical experts etc. But it 
would be hard to disagree that some events are won by sitting on the same 
frequency swapping numbers, and the guys with the loudest signals invariably 
do better.  We should acknowledge that so are many other groups with the 
same (or perhaps arguably better) motivation and technical skills. Some of 
these groups may be disrupted by our contest activity.  I think we should 
agree that some sort of band plan compromise may be a good thing if it could 
be practically realised.  Regards the overall calendar, the next couple of 
months don't see much in the way of 48 hour wall to wall QRM events - the 
"every weekend is written off" argument can be deflated.  The fact that we 
can hear ragchew QSOs complaining about contest activity, for example in the 
middle of the recent WPX SSB event, shows that there's not complete 
dominance by contesters. RoPoCo did not overwhelm the ragchewers on 80m this 
morning.

I think we should acknowledge the frustrations that non contesters feel, and 
also admit that there are individuals in our part of the hobby that do us no 
favours (poor signals, bending the rules a little too far regards band plan 
compliance etc.)  But the DX chasers have poor ops in their ranks, the SSTV 
fraternity have those who claim 'rights' to frequencies etc.  Contesters 
aren't perfect, but then again no other group is either.

At the one end of the scale, we have the claims that "contests every weekend 
prevent me from using the radio because of muti-kilowatt splattering signals 
with no regard for other operators or the bandplan."  There's an element of 
truth here, but it's not painting anything like a realistic view.  This 
doesn't help our cause, but it doesn't help their's either (unless people 
start to believe unsubstianted claims).  There are reasons why there is a 
vocal anti-contesting viewpoint.  There must be at least some merit to their 
argument. The recent IARU meeting had papers submitted attempting to address 
issues like the numbers of contests and bandplanning. I believe some of 
these will be difficult to put into practice, but at least it acknowledges 
further attempts to compromise and offer alternatives to those already 
offered by the likes of G3XTT in responding to the recent RadCom letters. 
The contest fraternity is making an effort - maybe these haven't been 
recognised, or publicised enough.

For me, contesting is a branch of amateur radio that has a large number of 
positive attributes. There are some negatives that should be addressed, but 
I feel that the benefits of contesting to me personally, and to the hobby as 
a whole outweigh them. The writers of the recent letters to RadCom have not 
acknowledged any of the on-air or off-air benefits of contesting that 
everyone reading this list is already fully aware of. I wonder, did these 
people simply not realise there is more to contesting than "59 + serial", or 
have deliberately chosen not to mention it ?

To expect empty bands to be available for use is like me expecting the M6 to 
be empty on Monday morning. I pay my road tax, so why should I suffer with 
traffic congestion ?

73,

Lee G0MTN