CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Un- vs. Assisted -- historical perspective?

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Un- vs. Assisted -- historical perspective?
From: "Art Boyars" <art.boyars@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 05:30:49 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
NS3T is a really good guy and a good op, so I was surprised to see him start 
the thread about combining the two entry classes.  I would keep them separate 
-- having other people find the QSOs for you is a whole lot different than two 
radios or even SCP.  KR2Q's historical perspective brought up most of the 
points that had come to my mind (except he forgot about the quota in ARRL CW).

Anyhow, thinking about the historical issues, I've been wondering if the people 
whose experience always had Internet and Packet have a different perspective 
than we OTs.  I think these newer op's might not have the OT's visceral 
understanding of the challenge -- and the satisfaction -- of actually hunting 
up a new mult by yourself.

(See also my next post, "Packet has ruined Ham Radio".)

73, Art K3KU
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] Un- vs. Assisted -- historical perspective?, Art Boyars <=