I think Frank K3UHF is asking some very good
questions in his most recent post. If these questions
could be answered, it would clear up a lot of
speculation and perhaps get this list back on track.
>>> If you want to change my opinion, I ask again
WHERE"S THE BEEF?
What are the percentages of self generated
QSOS and multipliers in their scores.
How many individual stations did they work as
compared to others.
I believe this is how you can prove me wrong.
Talking back to one station 146 times does not prove
you tried to work the community in general. Especially
when said station writes me and calls me a liar. One
would suspect that they are part of the team effort.
Similar to the complaints back east.>>>
I'm curious as to the actual answers myself. Obviously,
there's some degree of misunderstanding going on here. It
could be cleared up nicely with some straight answers.
If a prize-winning rover or fixed station won while adhering
to the PRIMARY rule governing all ARRL V/UHF contests,
then good for them, my hat's off. If they won without
adhering to that basic principle, then it's a hollow victory that
does ham radio and the contesting community little good. If
it became the norm to operate without giving a crap about
anyone else, this wouldn't be much fun now, would it?
Remember fun?? :) :)
Again, here's the guiding principle:
1. Object: To work as many amateur stations in as many
different 2 degrees by 1 degree grid squares as possible
using authorized frequencies above 50 MHz
I think when everyone started out contesting, they grasped
what this meant, without thinking ahead to loopholes.
I need to object to the continued deception of some calling
this thread rover-bashing. It's a red herring. If *any* rover
operation goes out with the intent of working any/all stations
they hear, then it's a good rover operation. If someone goes
out without that intent, then it's contrary to commonly held
principles. That's when objections and criticism may justifiably
occur. To raise the charges to "bashing" is overreaction; a
tactic designed to inflame things further, as opposed to
answering questions in a reasonable manner.
The objections that have been raised have to do with
possible operating practices, and not rovers. If the operating
practices are indeed following the spirit and intent of ARRL
rules, then there's no problem.
73,
Todd KC9BQA EN63ao 50 thru 2304
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|