I have no quarrel with making the exchange more difficult to copy, however I
would warn against anything that an operator can't generate on his own, such
as some unique identifier he can only get by signing on the CQ website and
registering.
That would mean that anybody who hasn't registered can't play, and contests
such as CQ WW are as much fun as they are because of all the folk who are
only casual, and play when they can, if they remember. Sometimes, a lot of
activity is generated simply by people turning on the radio and thinking
"Hey, sounds like a contest. Let's play for a bit."
A serial number is good: the idea that you can't use a serial number because
someone could copy it the QSO before and add one for theirs isn't really
valid. (Isn't that how we all learned to copy anyway? (Military radiomen
excluded.)) You could copy any exchange beforehand, unless you were to
create a system of rolling exchanges, such as the exchange you received the
Q previous (is there still a contest where you start with your name for QSO
No.1 and for QSO No. 2 send the name you received in QSO No. 1 and so on?).
That's a neat idea, but it really wouldn't play in a contest like WW. WW is
so well-known that most casual guys turn on a radio at the end of October
and know what the exchange is and have at it.
A rolling exchange I think would be like the QSY rule in Sprints: it would
relegate that contest to a niche contest that appeals to a more limited
audience. Another idea is that someone sends their Postal or Zip code, or
their area code or their house number. But whatever it is, it would have to
be something the operator knows. Casual guys aren't going to care enough to
sign on to a web site, but we still need them to make the contest fun.
A serial number would be a good change, but I don't think the sponsor would
go for that.
Which is fine by me. WW will still be fun either way.
73, kelly
ve4xt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <NN3W@prodigy.net>
To: <vo1he@rac.ca>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 8:49 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Exchanges (was SS SSB CONTEST)
> I really can't disagree here. The signal report in WW
> is useless - and frankly the zone is basically useless
> since CT and other logging programs actually fills it
> in for you. Of course, you still have to listen to
> ensure its correct.
>
> I think part of the calculus that keeps folks going in
> certain contests is knowing your competitor's Q
> scores. This past weekend in Sweepstakes, I heard my
> competitor's scores and it forced me to work even
> harder than I would have. I'm sure it might cause a
> few to quit, but the rest who are really in it will
> cause them to press on.
>
> In light of this, how about dispensing with the signal
> report in CQWW and change it to sequential QSO number
> and CQ zone?
>
> For stations that are M/2 or M/M, have the rules allow
> for separate QSO counters per transmitter. For those
> that are SO and M/S, the single sequential serial
> number would be sufficient.
>
> 73 Rich NN3W
> --- Original Message ---
> From: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
> To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SS SSB CONTEST
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >The only thing I would suggest for any contest is the
> inclusion of a unique
> >identifier for each QSO. A serial number, an honest
> signal report or
> >something that cannot be assumed gives the contester
> a little more of a
> >challenge to get the info correct. Simply knowing
> that I'm in zone 5 for the
> >CQWW, for example, all you need is my call and
> sometimes you can get that
> >from other stations calling me. SS takes it a bit
> farther with the serial
> >and check but even that can be derived beforehand. If
> each QSO had something
> >that was not able to be known before the contact was
> made, the importance of
> >confirming the contact is made all the greater.
> >
> >My 2 cents CDN (1.7 cents US)
> >
> >73 -- Paul VO1HE
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> >> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of
> >> n8ie@woh.rr.com
> >> Sent: November 21, 2005 18:48
> >> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SS SSB CONTEST
> >>
> >> If all contests were alike, then why bother? :-)
> >>
> >> I like the complexity of the sweeps, limited mults
> and only
> >> being able to work folks once changes the dynamics
> of this contest.
> >>
> >> Just my .02
> >>
> >> 73
> >> Dan, N8IE
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Bob Wruble <w7gg@comcast.net>
> >> Date: Monday, November 21, 2005 10:45 am
> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SS SSB CONTEST
> >>
> >> > if u think ss is so much fun try the naqp ....
> >> > it fixes all the things that are annoying in the
> ss!
> >> >
> >> > for example: its 12 hours shorter, u can work
> stations agn on each
> >> > band,the xhange is shorter, and mults count agn
> on each
> >> band .... etc
> >> >
> >> > not to detract from the ss format or heritage but
> it cud be made
> >> > better if the sponsor saw fit .... meanwhile glad
> u had fun
> >> in a well
> >> > know test & hope to cu in some of the other
> events....de gg
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "AD5VJ Bob" <rtnmi@sbcglobal.net>
> >> > To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> >> > Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 7:42 PM
> >> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] SS SSB CONTEST
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > WHAT A BLAST. BEST EVER CONTEST HAD LOTS OF FUN
> THANKS TO ALL WHO
> >> > > GAVE ME A CONTACT :0)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > 73 fer nw,
> >> > > Bob AD5VJ
> >> > >
> >> > > 10X# 37210, FP#-1141, SMIRK#-5177
> >> > > http://www.n5iet.com/
> >> > > Code may be taking a back seat for now, but the
> pioneering spirit
> >> > > that put the code there in the first place is
> out front of it all.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> > > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-
> contest
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-
> contest
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-
> contest
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >CQ-Contest mailing list
> >CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-
> contest
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|