[UK-CONTEST] CQ-100 et al

[Bob Henderson]

When that dear to us is threatened by enemy action, we can rise to its
defence or rush to surrender.  Only one of these is worthy of respect.

There is nothing achievable with PLA, which cannot be better achieved using
means not resulting in wholesale pollution of the HF spectrum.

If you value amateur radio and that precious resource, the HF spectrum,
defend them.

Bob, 5B4AGN



> Dave et al,
>
> One can now imagine hordes of gamers now embracing PLT as a means of
> enhancing the 'gaming experience'. How many gamers are there compared to
> radio amateurs??
>
> My point is (devil's advocate?) it will be a *real* struggle to hold our
> position against PLT in the face of a technology which the masses find a
> major enhancement to their internet experience. We are a tiny minority of
> 'weird' hobbyists in the opinion of much of the general public, sort of lots
> of Tony Hancocks locked away in their attics. If the armed forces or
> emergency services don't suffer we are on our own and that's kind of
> depressing. It will take something to persuade the public of the merits of
> amateur radio being a breeding ground for future engineers any more and the
> demographics of the amateur population doesn't help either.
>
> Is there, or will there be I wonder, a correlation between the march of PLT
> etc and the numbers of 'radio amateurs' moving over to CQ-100 and the like.
> Perhaps they would actually find PLT useful..!
>
> Time perhaps to redefine CQ-100 as amateur communications rather than
> amateur radio?
>
> 73,
>
> Stewart Rolfe, GW0ETF
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>