[UK-CONTEST] Contest Letters

Sat Jul 23 06:28:31 PDT 2011

I agree with your comments Bernie. Whilst didn't like the tone of the letters in Radcom I don't think we should be responding in a similar way. 
Replies should be polite and informative. As well as the self training aspect in propagation, antenna design, operating efficiency etc, I think two 
other points should be emphasised :

1 - As Bernie says a particular myth is that contesting is a separate activity. The idea being that a specific group of people come on the band and 
work each other, and these are purely contesters who would do nothing else, and that no-one outside this group would join in. We need to make the 
point that anyone and everyone can join in, and in fact are needed to join in. As an example, you don't need to be portable in a tent to take part in 
a Field Day and if only people in tents (etc) worked each other they would soon run out of Qs. Contests exist because many non-contesters join in the 
fun, gaining operating experience, propagation knowledge etc.

2 - It might be worthwhile making the point that the popularity of contesting has lead to many worldwide organisations sponsoring their own event, 
though the HFCC would hope that organisers act responsibly and not proliferate unnecessary contests. I think the RSGB has lead the way in this area, 
having cancelled some events over the years and only introduced new ones where there is a need.

Chris G3SJJ

On 23/07/2011 13:18, Bernie McIntosh (GM4WZG) wrote:
>
> I think some key points are being drawn out by Roger. Lets put it another
> way. Like so many problems in life, I believe folk are getting hung up on
> labels. What is the problem exactly ? People talk of contesting as if a
> contest is some kind of being in its own right - a kind of big bully radio
> amateur that uses more bandwidth than anyone else.
>
> There are times when the bands are very busy with contest activity. These
> bands are not destroyed by a "contest". They are in use by many individuals,
> none of whom are using any more bandwitdth than any other user of the band.
> Just like the folk in the pub who want to go out on a Friday night, they are
> choosing to go on air at a time to suit themselves and are just trying to
> enjoy ham radio.
>
>
> I do think that reasoned arguments put forward in a non aggressive and
> empathetic and educational way are the only way to deal with the
> anti-contesting comments that are placed in the letters page or elsewhere.
> IMHO it's a big mistake to ignore adverse comment.
>
> Unfortunately we are our own worst enemy at times and sometimes the
> arguments in favour of allowing us to enjoy our contests come over as
> arrogant.  Whilst we all have our own part to play I do look to the contest
> chairman to be a model of PR for us all and to ensure that all points are
> put forward in a comprehensive and positive way on all possible platforms
> and that the views of those that enjoy contesting are represented in the
> RSGB. I'm not implying at all that he isn't doing that now, I'm just
> reconfirming the importance of this role.
>
> With regard to "flooding" the editor with letters, I do not think I can
> second guess the editor of a magazine. All I can do is when I see a letter
> that is trying to unfairly limit one of my favourite activities I am
> inclined to write a letter in response. I would hope that anyone else in
> that situation would do the same.
>
> 73
>
> Bernie GM4WZG
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> uk-contest-request at contesting.com
> Sent: 23 July 2011 12:13
> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: UK-Contest Digest, Vol 103, Issue 39
>
> Send UK-Contest mailing list submissions to
> 	uk-contest at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	uk-contest-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	uk-contest-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
> "Re: Contents of UK-Contest digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>     1. Re: RadCom letters (David Ferrington, M0XDF)
>     2. Re: RadCom letters (Lee Volante)
>     3. Re: RadCom letters (Dave Lawley)
>     4. Re: RadCom letters (David Ferrington, M0XDF)
>     5. Re: RadCom letters (Roger Western)
>     6. Re: RadCom letters (Roger Western)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 10:39:33 +0100
> From: "David Ferrington, M0XDF"<M0XDF at Alphadene.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RadCom letters
> To: UK Contest Reflector<uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID:<F27D7E23-E161-4660-ADE5-113F0BBEA2B6 at Alphadene.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> If she doesn't print them, it's because they don't like the content,
> flooding them just means more work for the editor and us unpopular with
> RadCom staff! imho
>
> By all means write a few letters expressing contesters side of things, maybe
> even write an article about what it takes to be a contester (but don't
> frighten off newcomers).
> 73 de M0XDF
>
> On 23 Jul 2011, at 00:18, Dave Lawley wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>> * GM7V EU-010 in IOTA *
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 11:25:36 +0100
> From: "Lee Volante"<g0mtn1 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RadCom letters
> To: "UK Contest Reflector"<uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID:<2FA19700CEE44BCC8E0955ABEA17BA94 at leemain>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
>
> 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
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 11:32:56 +0100
> From: Dave Lawley<dave at g4buo.com>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RadCom letters
> To: UK Contest Reflector<uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID:<4E2AA358.704 at g4buo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> I always enjoy your contributions to any debate on this reflector Lee,
> always well-considered and sensible. The only part I'd take issue with
> is "Maybe Steve G3ZVW could devote a future RadCom column to it -
> debunking some myths especially for the non-contester?" because I'm sure
> the letter-writers positively don't read Steve's column! That's why I
> think some letters giving a different point of view are called for.
>
> Yes, the Editor has definitely let us down and I think we need to test
> her impartiality.
>
> 73, Dave G4BUO
>
> Lee Volante wrote:
>> 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
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 11:37:58 +0100
> From: "David Ferrington, M0XDF"<M0XDF at Alphadene.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RadCom letters
> To: Chris Tran GM3WOJ<zl1ct1 at gm7v.com>
> Cc: 'UK Contest Reflector'<uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID:<D672F935-495A-4F2A-872F-014E9CF9313A at Alphadene.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Let me try to present the opposite perspective then - I'm not a big
> contester (mostly UKAC and VHFFD), but I'm not a big Ragchewer or DXer
> either - I just try to get on sometimes and enjoy.
>
> > From the non-contesters point of view, there are very many contests, you
> may think there aren?t enough, but the non-contesters don't think that way.
> Some of these radio amateurs may only have a rig for one or two bands, so
> WARC may not be an option, and before you say - "well get a multi-band rig",
> perhaps they can't afford to or particularly like the band they are on - or
> perhaps they are limited for antenna space etc. etc.
>
> For whatever reasons they aren?t moving, and I agree, they could try turning
> the dial - but on some contest weekends, there is no-where to turn - the
> contest really does take over the band. The issue for the non-contesters is
> that Ragchewing and DXing don't take over the band, so they may feel it's
> all one sided.
>
> Imagine how you would feel if ragchewing was capable of preventing you being
> able to operate in a contest because the entire band was full of ragchewers
> and there was no-where to call - I think you'd be pretty feed up too!
>
> Contesters are seen as the bain of non-contesters lives - quite often only
> at the weekend (as someone wrote, the only time they can get on the air). To
> them we are as bad as PLT or that Plasma TV next door.
>
> Now I'm sure some of you understand the RFI feeling - that's how some of
> these non-contesters feel about contesters.
>
>
> This isn't true about the vast majority of non-contesters, I know plenty
> that accept there are other sides to the hobby and don't get upset about the
> contest - they just avoid them or work at different times, but as is often
> the case, it's the minority that appear to be be heard - the rest of us just
> get on with it.
>
>
> does that to understand or am I just muddling the waters?
>
> 73 de M0XDF
> On 23 Jul 2011, at 09:06, Chris Tran GM3WOJ wrote:
>
>> Hello Dave / Jim et al
>>
>> Well there are no contests this weekend so I've time to write a letter to
>> Elaine.
>>
>> I've tried but failed to see our contesting activities from the
> complainers
>> perspective. To me contesting is a great way of keeping sharp
>> operating-wise, overcoming interesting technical issues and keeping up
> band
>> occupancy. If you have an otherwise busy life, it crams a lot of QSOs into
> a
>> short time.
>>
>> Whatever the complaining RSGB members think, they are never going to
>> influence anyone internationally - if we remove an RSGB contest from the
>> calendar another larger contest will grab that empty weekend.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 12:05:08 +0100
> From: "Roger Western"<g3sxw at btinternet.com>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RadCom letters
> To: "'UK Contest Reflector'"<uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID:<C732FDF77749453E999649C46B1DDC9A at RogerDell>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
>
> Jim - their logic escapes me! The bands are full of signals because there
> are SO many contesters. The anti-contest brigade are dogs in mangers: they
> don't use the spectrum - when there's no contest the bands are dead. I can't
>
> reserve my favourite parking spot at the supermarket or my favourite seat on
>
> the train so they shouldn't expect an empty frequency, especially when tens
> of thousands are active.
>
> Some nights I drop in to my local pub and there's a load of people in there
> enjoying themselves, for goodness sake. Why can't a fellow sit quietly in
> the corner and read his book any longer. I mean t'say, every time I walk
> into a pub these days I can hear someone talking. They're so selfish, making
>
> noise like that - I expect peace and quiet in the pub. It's only fair. Every
>
> time I hear someone talking I just see red.  I think that all pubs should
> ban entry by more than five people at a time. I'm not prepared to be
> banished to the quiet reading room so I'm going to give up drinking.
>
> Are there really 'so many' complaints? It suits RadCom to publish the odd
> letter every year or two - good journalism to stir up controversy. Everyone
> knows that contesters attract younger new hams, they are the life-blood of
> the hobby, pushing the technology envelope etc etc etc. One third of the HF
> bands are contest-free, there are very few large multi-mode contests. Let's
> face it there's always somewhere for an anti-contester to go but they don't
> want to: they love to hate.
>
> 73 de Roger/G3SXW.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Kellaway
> Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2011 8:52 AM
> To: 'UK Contest Reflector'
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RadCom letters
>
> Since there are so many complaints about contesting maybe we should get our
> heads out of the sand. I am sure most of the anti brigade are not completely
> against them. It just the number of contests that is the problem. Glib
> comments about WARC bands etc don't really cut the mustard.
>
> I wonder how many UK stations entered the various contests last weekend?
>
> 73 Jim G3RTE
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Dave Lawley
> Sent: 23 July 2011 00:18
> To: UK Contest Reflector
> 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
>>
>> * GM7V EU-010 in IOTA *
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 12:12:38 +0100
> From: "Roger Western"<g3sxw at btinternet.com>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RadCom letters
> To: "David Ferrington, M0XDF"<M0XDF at Alphadene.co.uk>,	"Chris Tran
> 	GM3WOJ"<zl1ct1 at gm7v.com>
> Cc: 'UK Contest Reflector'<uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID:<D157E82216CC475BB6450276795F5013 at RogerDell>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
> 	reply-type=original
>
> Dave - but that's the whole point - when there's no contest the bands are
> empty!
> 73 de Roger/G3SXW.
>
>> Imagine how you would feel if ragchewing was capable of preventing you
>> being able to operate in a contest because the entire band was full of
>> ragchewers
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
> End of UK-Contest Digest, Vol 103, Issue 39
> *******************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>