[VHFcontesting] Assisted categories

[Keith Morehouse]

No, I don't agree with you Ward. Many people requested a change in the
spotting rules, specifically to mirror the CQVHF rules. Using
packetcluster, or whatever you want to call the current spotting network,
was not the goal of anyone I talked with, including my Director.

In my opinion, creating a Assisted class was all done at HQ. It is also my
opinion (mine, and mine alone), that this was pushed by a cadre of
traditionalists (some would refer to them as "HF ops") who are standing in
the way of getting realistic rules (see the CQVHF rules, as a start)
because "they" feel them to be somehow un-pure.

That should fan the flames a bit...

Jay W9RM

Keith Morehouse
via Nexus 7
On Jan 3, 2015 10:22 AM, "Ward Silver" <hwardsil at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, maybe so, maybe not - but this change was *requested* by enough
> people that their *Directors* initiated the change, not the Contest Branch
> staff.   The CAC is tasked by the P&SC to evaluate specific questions.
> They recommend a change and the P&SC decides what to direct the staff to
> do.  Talk to your Director if you don't like it.
>
> And you do not need to use spotting information in any way - just enter SO
> instead of SOU.
>
> 73, Ward N0AX
>
> On 1/3/2015 11:00 AM, vhfcontesting-request at contesting.com wrote:
>
>> And, in my opinion, there are few things as worthless as watching packet
>> spots during a January VHF test. Unless, of course, one is in the New
>> England 'corridor'. Hmmmm...;)
>>
>> Gosh, packetcluster assistance allowed...thanks again, contest branch...
>>
>> Jay W9RM
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>