[UK-CONTEST] Latest IARU C5 VHF Newsletter

[Ray James]

--- On Sat, 8/11/08, don.field at gmail.com <don.field at gmail.com> wrote:

> It is clear from his frequent postings on here and private
> messages to myself and other members of the Contest Committee that Ray
> will not be happy until we accede to his demands, irrespective of what
> other participants want.


For a start, in case anyone reads Don's comments and believes there has been a myriad of emails, I believe I have only ever sent 2 emails to Don and they were not initiated by me but replies to a couple of his to myself. My only other correspondence with a member of the CC was 4 emails on 14/4/2007 with Ian G0FCT following the announcement of the "spotting" rule changes. For obvious reasons, I'm not including the small number of thank you messages to Roger G4BVY! 

We obviously will have to agree to disagree because my greatest concern is that we as UK radio amateurs need to be pro-active in trying to turn around the drastic reduction in VHF/UHF/Microwave contest participation that continues to occur. I look to those who have the time and experience to volunteer to oversee such contest activity to lead the way with innovative contests and rules that generate a spark of interest and enthusiasm to participate from every single quarter of the UK. Making a start with the regular monthly UK Activity Contests could lead to greater participation during the big ones in March, VHF NFD and October.    

If I am a pain in the CC's rear end for caring about our hobby and the interests of many within it, and its future, then so be it.
I'm not asking a lot!
All I'm suggesting is the M2 multiplier rule in UKAC's, a great regular monthly opportunity to encourage activity from newcomers and old hands alike from all over these Isles, is ditched in favour of a UK multiplier that encourages folk from all quarters to participate.
 
> Ray talks about the need for the Committee to "impose
> rules" but we do try to listen to what the participants want. 
> The survey showed a strong preference for retaining the current scoring > system. 

Changing the 2009 scoring to points per kilometre rather than one point per qso does nothing new to generate activity. 
Retaining M2 still means that the majority of current entrants and therefore likely survey respondents (the South East Quarter) will still look away from the UK for a fair proportion of contacts so who on earth would want to give away that advantage in a survey? 

The UKAC Survey asked the right questions including the inclusion of postal code or county multipliers, but needed a leadership decision on what they considered the very best for ALL of the UK. Instead, it comes across as they were bound by the result of the survey.
 
> It seems that many entrants do enjoy chasing "DX" rather than UK
> squares, even at the cost, maybe, of a lower score. Perhaps for them the > benefit of a contest is generating activity, rather than the opportunity > to achieve a winning score.

Don, now we're getting somewhere.
My suggestion in no way deflects from that interest that we all enjoy.
What I am asking the CC to consider is that there is DX to be had right here in the UK and you and your committee have the ability to generate it by attracting them with attractive rules. The current M2 rule gives a substantial advantage to anyone in the South East Quarter (JO00, 01, 02, 03, IO90, 91, 92) and in doing so does not inspire elsewhere in very great numbers. Many, including myself, would be interested to participate, even with no chance of winning, in regular monthly contests of activity when everyone stands on a relatively similar footing. At present we don't. 

 
> Ray also suggests that we failed, in that "even on
> this reflector, some were unaware of its (the survey) existence". 

Sorry, I missed that one!

>But the very fact that we have trialled a survey is, I would suggest, a >step forward for the Contest Committee and, hopefully, something we can >build on in future. However, if those like Ray feel we should then ignore >the results and simply follow the exhortations of one or two who shout >loudest, then frankly there would be no point in running a survey in the >first place. He cannot have it both ways.

Don, out of all the many questions asked within the survey and the mouth watering options one could pick, only 2 major changes took place.
Despite all the questions and options aimed at encouraging greater UK participation, none where forthcoming or rather, they were ignored.
If you continually reference the survey as the gospel for the Contest Committee decision then it's stands to reason the survey results come under the spotlight, simply because it is most likely made up by a majority of respondents with more to lose than gain with a change.    
For this reason, I believe a strong committee should be able to acknowledge points respondents make but be prepared to look at the wider picture and implications and reach a decision that may not agree with what survey respondents have stated. The only resource I have available is the numerous "claimed scores" pages of UKAC participants. The survey respondents should closely match the same geographical location and that would explain why a majority would answer the way they would. I don't blame them but it's time we looked at encouraging all UK radio amateurs and there is no better contest to start than in the various UK Activity Contests. 

73 Ray GM4CXM

IO75TW GS