[UK-CONTEST] New CQ WW Category

[Paul O'Kane]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Callum m0mcx" <callum at mccormick.uk.com>

> They did give it a new name, they called it "Xtreme"
> category.

That's correct, and the implication is that it's an
extreme form of amateur radio contesting.

There's just one problem - once you use something other
than amateur-band RF in the signal path between the two
people concerned, it's no longer amateur radio - or does
anyone defend the argument "Of course I'm still sailing -
it's only a little engine."   

>  But you need to get over this Paul.

There's nothing to get over - Xtreme contesting is a 
perfectly valid pursuit in its own right, it just happens
to be something other than amateur radio - you need to get
over this Callum :-)

> There really are some people that genuinely get
> turned on by pushing all this stuff. It's fun.

I can think of a few other things that are fun and turn
me on, but no one pretends they're amateur radio.

> These people don't want to live in a current technology
> world, they want to experiment with new things.

Here we go again with the same old hoary arguments. Imagine
going fishing with a fly at the end of a line - how dreary
and how primitive!  Enthusiasts do that for its own sake -
if they introduced "new technology" to make it more fun, it
would soon have to be called something else.

> You must let them move along this footpath rather than
> knocking it.

Knocking it?  I'm explaining how it differs from amateur
radio. When I want to mix RF and the internet, I connect
to Skype with my wireless broadband link.

> There are a dozen very experienced, extremely capable
> individuals who can motivate this large body of people from
> their position of status and you are one of them.

My interest is in motivating people to use amateur-band RF
for amateur radio QSOs.

>  You must let technology run its course.

Once again, by the same logic, all racing sailboats should
use engines, and cyclists should use motors, and fly-fishermen
should use nets (or explosives - they're much more effective).

> If you don't and verbalise as such, the whole community will
> believe that there's something wrong with progress.

It all depends on which direction you're progressing :-)

> let it happen. Encourage it. You can still have an unassisted,
> single op category and I won't think any different about what
> you are doing.

I am an amateur radio enthusiast, not a communications
enthusiast.  I have no interest in working stations that
use professional broadcasting and relay techniques, no
matter how advanced the technology may be.  As a radio
amateur, I expect to contact people through the medium of
amateur-band RF.

> Let us both respect each side of the debate
> rather than ridiculing it out of court.

If anyone feels ridiculed, could it be from trying to defend
the indefensible?   :-)  This notion of extreme contesting
is as inappropriate as extreme athletics would be.  How
about allowing trampolines in high-jumping?  Now, that would
be progress - the simple application of technology. We would
soon see a few new records.

73,
Paul EI5DI