Hay Guys and Gals, it is nice to know that the idea of shutting down all
the DXClusters is having a growing intrest . This would also definitely
bring a solution to the cheating business in Assisted and Not assisted
entries.
Remember the topic on the Contest reflector last year and my comments (déja
vu ) .
But probably some of the big guns will disagree . I think as John N2NC says
in his mail that the challenge is big and maybe it will bring back the days
where we had nothing else than our own abilities to find what was available
.
Contests should not be won by the Nr of Dxclusters that one can see but with
the skills to replace them and do as good or even better.....
See You all next time in the WPXSSB at OT2A and WPXCW as CT7T
73 and enjoy the hobby,
Jim - ON5UM
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>From Steve Daniel" <nn4t@bellsouth.net Thu Feb 21 12:41:36 2002
From: Steve Daniel" <nn4t@bellsouth.net (Steve Daniel)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] quiet 17" monitor
References: <F213GykBbKP7Ie8tlMa0001b726@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <082201c1bad5$1aa054c0$6476d6d1@nn4t>
Another simple solution is a flat screen. They are dropping rapidly in price
and cause no noise at all that I can detect. An added bonus is they have a
dramatically smaller foot print and look really cool! Steve, NN4T.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Thivierge" <bruce_thivierge@hotmail.com>
To: <k6ll@juno.com>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] quiet 17" monitor
>
> I also picked up a new 17" Envision monitor this weekend. It is an
EN-770e.
> Paid quite a bit more than you did (ahem) but it is also very quiet so far
> (fingers crossed). Maybe we're onto something here?
>
> 73 Bruce W1RJ
>
> >
> >
> >Staples ran a sale this past weekend on the Envision EN-710E
> >17" Computer Monitor. It was $59 delivered, after rebates and
> >coupons.
> >
> >I just got mine, and I can't hear a peep out of this monitor on
> >any of the HF Ham Bands. It looks like a good bet, if you can find
> >it on sale again. It looks good, too. I haven't transmitted with
> >it yet.
> >
> >Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
> >Yuma, AZ
> >K6LL@juno.com
> >
> >
> >--
> >CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> >Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
> >
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>From Steve Daniel" <nn4t@bellsouth.net Thu Feb 21 13:10:34 2002
From: Steve Daniel" <nn4t@bellsouth.net (Steve Daniel)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Contests and Packet
References: <3C747F91.F080FE1B@cncnet.com>
Message-ID: <083101c1bad9$26d2bfe0$6476d6d1@nn4t>
I have followed the "real men don't use packet" theme for at least 5 years
now and still do not understand it. As there are assisted and non-assisted
single-op categories the line there is easily drawn. When it comes to
multi-op situations, however, I really do not understand. Isn't the object
to make as many Q's/mults as possible during the contest period so as to
maximize your score? Isn't packet simply one more tool to use in this quest?
Isn't integrating packet into the multi-op environment in a way that
increases efficiency and score a worthy goal? How is this different from any
other of the tools we use to increase our scores?
This is a hobby and is suppose to be fun. If this floats your boat, go for
it. Implying, however, that eliminating packet somehow makes your effort
more "pure" and of greater value is just your ego talking.
P.S. If you guys really want to impress us, how about a multiop where no one
goes to the bathroom for 48 hours? My guess is that would take care of any
problem with operators falling asleep on the job! Steve, NN4T.----- Original
Message -----
From: "Bill Snider" <k6km@cncnet.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 11:03 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Contests and Packet
>
> I've long been an advocate for shutting down all packet during
> major (TBD) contests. So far, support for this idea has been
> nonexistent. Maybe it isn't as important now that we can access
> spotting data via the internet.
>
> In the past, nodemeisters had the power to elimnate their contest
> competition merely by locking 'em out of their cluster. It happened
> to me. It could happen again to anyone who wants to do a serious
> multiop without internet access.
>
> I'm not one to negate techincal progress and I envy those who
> have found new ways to make bigger scores through tech innovation.
> BUT local packet did and maybe still does give too much
> power to the node sysop.
>
> Shields up.
>
> Bill K6KM
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>
>
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|