CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] DC and NAQP

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] DC and NAQP
From: Mike Tessmer <mtessmer@mindspring.com>
Reply-to: Mike Tessmer <k9nw@qth.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 16:11:59 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I've been surprised at some of the response to this seemingly simple question.  
You'd think I was proposing a complete restructuring of the NAQP.  Perhaps I 
should have just asked "Why would this be bad for NAQP?"  It's quite apparent 
that some of y'alls have VERY strong feelings about this!  (per my Inbox...)  
That's fine, even though I don't quite understand some of the sentiment.

-- How might this improve NAQP?

Maybe/probably nothing noticeable.  I'm pretty certain it wouldn't cause 
irreparable harm.  Adding another mult would have exactly the same effect as 
when FJ split from FS, and PJ5/6 split from PJ7.  Well, except for that DC has 
active ops.

-- Less fun for DC ops because of QSY requests?

Probably no less fun than it is for guys like KO7X, VE4EAR, KC0W, and any 
others who may be "one man shows" in any given event, and get asked to move 
around.  

For now, DC isn't a mult in NAQP.  It could be.  It doesn't have to be.  It's 
all good.


73, Mike K9NW


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

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