CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] IF SKIMMER INTERESTS YOU - READ THIS ONE

To: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] IF SKIMMER INTERESTS YOU - READ THIS ONE
From: "Tom Haavisto" <kamham69@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 10:06:55 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Hi David

I believe you have come to a workable solution: have a Classic
category - no packet, no skimmer - just "A boy and his radio".

That said, I do have one concern: the proliferation of categories.
Consider SOSB, SOSB(A), and SOSB(Classic) for every band, plus SOAB,
SOAB(A) and  SOAB(Classic).  Triple that for HP, LP and QRP.  For SOAB
HP and LP , I can see there is plenty of interest in this category,
but for SOSB, I am not sure there is enough interest to warrant adding
another category.

No - I don't have a solution, but I did wish to raise this issue as a
concern.  If there will be a rule change/new category, I think this
area would also have to be addressed as well.

Tom - VE3CX






>
> Personally, I think a sub-category called CLASSIC added to the mix for
> all categories, SOSB, SOAB, M/S, M/2 and M/M would be rather neat. This
> co-called Classic category could be setup for those wishing to do things
> the old fashioned way, with radios, antennas, and yes, computers for
> logging (who has time for paperwork these days). No packet, no skimmer,
> just find them and work them.
>
> I am working on my suggested rules changes.
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>