[WriteLog] Minnesota QSO Party

[Les, VA7LC]

I find your reply sarcastic and condescending.

Looked to me like you are feeling guilty about this one. If you can't or
won't keep up with the QSO Party rule changes, then remove the contest from
the program, and let somebody who is interested write the module.
Should I email all my requests to you personally? Why have a reflector?
And, if you don't add them to your "to-do's list, what is the point?

If you spent more time on the average Joe who is in the majority , i.e. SOLP
(cw,ssb), than all these esoteric upgrades for multi multi's, networking,
RTTY/MMTTY idiosyncrasies, SO2R, packet users(who don't seem to be able to
search the bands for themselves) then we wouldn't need to post to the
reflector.

Maybe you should spend your time making a contest template for the QSO
Parties, then we wouldn't need to bother you with our little requests.
The 'Big Guns' of course don't bother with these small contests. They are in
the minority (and pay the least), but who want all those fancy 'wish lists'

I like the program. I WANT to use it. I paid for it. I paid to be upgraded,
and I will probably pay to upgrade again.
I would have sent this to you personally, but since you posted to the
reflector on my failures, I thought the reflector should read my reply.

Naturally I expect to be flamed and denigrated by the 'faithful'.

No need for the 'killfile' guys, this is my last post to the reflector.

Les Corris, VA7LC




----- Original Message -----


From: "W. Wright, W5XD" <w5xd at writelog.com>
To: "'WriteLog Reflector'" <writelog at contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 10:06 AM
Subject: RE: [WriteLog] Minnesota QSO Party


> >
> > I have to say I'm a little disappointed.
> >
> > Feb 2002 I took part in the Minnesota QSO Party. At that time
> > I had to use a
> > logging program by WR0DK because the WriteLog contest module
> > for Minnesota
> > was not up-to-date with the rules then current. Well here we
> > are one year
> > later and nothing has changed.
>
>
> OK, guilty as charged.
>
> If you really want this problem fixed, you might consider the
> timing of your requests.  Waiting until there is no time to code
> and test the required changes before you note the problem is not
> a recipe to end your disappointment. Yes, I should have
> remembered to do something based on the 30 Jan 2002
> complaints filed here by the same person last year
> (http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/writelog/2002-January/009199.html),
> but  I failed to add them to my list. So you behaved the same
> this year as last year, and so did I. And the result,
> (are we surprised?) is the same again.
>
> Since this is the second year, maybe it will make my
> todo list properly. However, for small contests who's rules
> are prone to change, I am very likely to wait until
> next year's rules are published before doing anything,
> as I really don't have the energy to fix the same
> contest rules twice in the same year. So you might want
> to "help" me remember this particular one.
>
> On the other hand, if your goal is to be able to post
> well-founded complaints on the reflector, you have
> found a reliable mechanism.
>
> Wayne, W5XD
> _______________________________________________
> WriteLog mailing list
> WriteLog at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
>