On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, N7MAL wrote:
>
> Well Pete I'm not associated with and don't support any club or team.
> Included is the packet-cluster log. You call it what you want I call it
> "pimping". It is soliciting contacts for W3AO by members of PVRC to benefit
> PVRC and I believe it should be grounds to disqualify W3AO.
>
> 223500.0 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 1632Z FM K <W4XP>
> 144190.0 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 1607Z K
> <K3SX>
> 28020.0 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 1542Z 21A MD PVRC K <K3SKE>
> 3920.0 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 1452Z 21A MDSH/D K <K3SKE>
> 7233.0 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 1450Z 21A MD K <K3SKE>
> 14224.0 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 1448Z 21A MD K <K3SKE>
> 21360.0 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 1447Z 21a md K
> <K3SKE>
> 28467.0 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 1447Z 21A md K
> <K3SKE>
> 3862.5 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 0628Z Go PVRC!!! K <WX3B>
> 21394.0 W3AO 24-Jun-2001 0308Z K
> <K3SX>
>
Well, I'm not a member of PVRC. I'm a member of SMC - remember us? :-)
I don't take offense in the above because (1) Field Day isn't a contest,
and (2) what's the big deal? It would be worthwhile for someone to look
at the associated W3AO logs to see if their QSO rates actually jumped
after the aforementioned spots. I suspect in most cases they didn't. I
am also curious how many FD operations had packet spotting gear at their
site. We at K9CU did not, mainly because we had our hands full with all
the equipment we did have at the site. No one wanted to drag along
anything extra beyond the minimum to get on the air. At least 80% of the
operators we had at K9CU weren't contesters. They were club members out
to have fun and just maybe to get a small spark started so that they may
eventually become contesters.
73, Zack W9SZ
Proud member of SMC, Twin City Amateur Radio Club Contesters and
CQ-Contest reflector
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|