[UK-CONTEST] RadCom letters

[Lee Volante]

Hi,

I would have hoped that the second round of letters in the August RadCom 
would not have been published.  The initial letter was stating a point of 
view, and it was published because invariably there are other letters 
submitted stating a very similar point of view.  What would have been far 
preferable is that the Contest Committee Chairman, or the Director for Sport 
Radio added a rebuttal similar to Chris' comments below in the July RadCom, 
and that would have been the end of the story, at least for a while.  As 
Roger G3SXW mentions, we go around this loop periodically, and there are 
always more letters printed stating the hyperbole of 'contesters ruined ham 
radio' rather than the more measured comments which a neutral party might 
agree are closer to the truth.

I'm very disappointed with the RadCom Editor for not heeding those earlier 
comments and then publishing further letters. This is not what I expect from 
my 'service led' RSGB. There are other recent examples of balanced replies 
about M5FUN's recent article, or the comments about 3 feet high dipoles etc. 
in the Letters pages to draw discussion to a close, but in our case we've 
been let down (again.)  RSGB is keen to promote positive aspects of amateur 
radio - RadCom front covers, pictures on the website etc. showcase what we 
get up to in the hobby, but the Letters pages do bring everything back down 
to earth by largely being about complaints. There's a divide of needing to 
publish the views of the membership that have bothered to right in, against 
the impression that those letters will give to the thousands of members 
reading them.

It's almost certain we would not change the minds of the "anti-contester 
brigade" with any replies, but it is important as Dave mentions that a 
balanced viewpoint is put across. This will take more space than the Letters 
Page would allow.  Maybe Steve G3ZVW could devote a future RadCom column to 
it - debunking some myths especially for the non-contester?   It's time for 
more facts and fewer rants to be published.  We could mention to the RadCom 
letter writers to come to Contest University and find out what it's really 
all about, but I doubt that would happen.

Any published reply needs to be done carefully though - I'm wary of the 'use 
the WARC bands' argument as often the propagation on some of the other bands 
isn't available elsewhere - it needs to be spelled out that during the vast 
majority of contest weekends, very few contests will completely occupy the 
spectrum. So if you want to use 80, 40 or 20, most of the time there are 
ample clear frequencies there.  VHF / UHF overcrowding is not a problem for 
these contests. Contesters represent only a small proportion of the amateur 
population, but a large proportion of those active and on-air. Contesting 
and contesters are by no means perfect, and there are bad eggs in every area 
of interest that makes up amateur radio, but I'm proud of being a contester 
for many reasons the RadCom letter writers probably won't be aware of.

73,

Lee G0MTN

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Lawley" <dave at g4buo.com>
To: "UK Contest Reflector" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2011 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RadCom letters


>I disagree Chris. The constant drip drip drip of anti-contest letters
> gives the impression to others that contests are bad. I think it *is*
> time for contesters to flood Radcom with reasoned arguments why contests
> are a good thing, and pointing out some of the flaws in the recent 
> letters.
>
> Then, if the Editor doesn't print them we will know she is biased.
>
> 73, Dave G4BUO
>
> Chris Tran GM3WOJ wrote:
>> Hello all
>>
>> These letters to RadCom from the anti-contest brigade are, in a word,
>> tedious. They demonstrate complete ignorance of what is involved in 
>> setting
>> up even a modest contest station. They also seem to lack any clarity as 
>> to
>> what it is they are actually wanting - is it completely empty bands which
>> they can use at any time of their choosing ?
>>
>> The letter writers also are blind to the fact that contesting is the
>> ultimate 'self-training', stimulates a lot of band activity, makes rare 
>> DXCC
>> entities available and that many technological innovations are a result 
>> of
>> contesting.
>>
>> Quoting from one of this month's letters "The WARC bands were almost dead 
>> as
>> far as I was concerned, CW wasn't so good either, so like Bill I just
>> switched off!" - hmmm, this doesn't make sense.
>>
>> Let's hope these letters fizzle out - as contesters it is tempting to 
>> reply
>> correcting their misconceptions, but I have a feeling we'll just add fuel 
>> to
>> the flames.
>>
>> 73
>> Chris
>> GM3WOJ