Glenn,
While some pine for the days of yore when there were no devices containing
silicon involved in radio, the reality is that packet, spotting networks, et
al are now fully part of amateur radio DXing and contesting landscapes.
No nostalgic perspectives will change that.
I would not take these criticisms of using packet personally - as they are
not directed to you, or to me - I always operate assisted - for decades now
- literally. I like the technology integration. I liked it when I first used
it when AK1A launched the original PacketCluster back in the 80's.
The reason there is all of this acrimony towards the use of spotting is
specifically in the single op NOT-Assisted category. The question the survey
asked was (basically) should single op assisted be combined with single op
Not-Assisted?
This is the controversial question.
Many of us, me included, do not want the two combined. In my opinion, once
that were to happen, the traditional single ops would be forced to use
spotting if they wanted to be competitive.
Why would we want to do such a thing and eliminate the most competitive
category in the contest?
The answer is simple - some people who enter as single op not-assisted,
well... they cheat.
How do they cheat?
They use spotting networks.
They use relief or additional operators.
They use relief or additional operators at other locations.
They use remote receivers.
They run excessive power output.
They exceed the power limit for the category they're entering.
They operate outside the limits of their licenses.
They invent new ways of cheating.
In my opinion, the lowest of the low are those who willingly participate as
second operators for someone submitting a single op entry. Aside from
monetary compensation, what possibly could be the motivation for doing this?
So, don't take any of this personally - keep operating as you want, have
fun, and don't waste time fretting about such things.
73,
Bob W5OV
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Glenn Wyant
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 7:08 AM
To: JIM NEIGER; K1AR@aol.com; cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey
I now realize from the postings on this reflector that
I am not a real DX'er
I am not a real contester
The problem is that I casually enter the contest , I use
the cluster network, and I generally only make around 1,000
qsos.. I do submit my logs .. ( as assisted )
I thought that even my few qsos might promote the contest,
I never thought that my efforts would be regarded as those
of an inferior ham , ( just because the cluster was on here ).
Recent postings have convinced me , that running assisted is
regarded as a undesireable in the contesting genre. Until I dump
the cluster I will never gain any respect from the so-called
elite members of the non-assisted club.
Nevertheless I will carry on , enjoying the hobby in my way,
even though I will be a Cluster scumbag in some folks views.
Glenn VA3DX
From: "JIM NEIGER" Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey
> With all due respect, one might reasonably ask as to why such an asinine
> survey is even contemplated if someone did not already have a canned a
> priori result in mind and seeking a one size fits all solution.
>
> If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a
> duck..................it's probably a duck.
>
> If one sincerely wanted to improve the CQ WW and CQ WPX contests, they
> would address the abhorrent 1 point 2 point 3 point dance that's a
> throwback to AM phone, no transceive on CW, no SSB, contesting years. (I
> remember, I was there). Solving that would truly open-up DXpeditions to
> the Caribbean Islands and re-ignite JA and middle east Asia enthusiasm.
> (Shame on me to actually suggest something that might be a plus to contest
> activity and real DXing, rather than having to rely on someone else to
> find your DX for you and copy their call for you.)
>
> Another way to go back to real men operating skills, let's convert these
> contests into the NA SPRINT format -- for 48 hours. You call CQ, you give
> up your frequency and QSY at least 5 kcs. before the next CQ. I don't
> think packet, skimmer and RBN crutches will do too well in that format and
> if the goal here is solely to eliminate packet cheaters, umm, I think that
> might work. Anyone here ready to MAN-UP for something like this?
>
> So very sadly, today's Generation X has no clue on how to operate, and it
> shows. Oh boy, skimmer. Let's see how good ZD8LID really is: we will
> all be S-5 and zero beat on his signal. Good luck on getting ZD8LID
> active in your next contest. But hey, look at all the new "operators"
> we've brought into contesting. Oh boy..............
>
> Sadly, what my classmate @ NYU opined fifty years ago: "If you don't have
> enough on the ball, get a smaller ball" has become the reality.
>
> Vy 73,
>
> Jim Neiger N6TJ ZD8LID
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: K1AR@aol.com
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 2:05 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey
>
> To members of the Bruised Egos & Assisted Sucks Club,
>
> A few facts:
>
> 1) The distribution of the CQWW survey did not include a devious strategy
> to exclude you. Randy used the WW email list from his received logs
> database. Advice: Stop whining, get over yourself, take a breath and just
> answer
> the #$*&%% survey if it still bothers you. Many, many thousands have been
> received so far. This channel feels like the Geritol Net at times. Any
> other
> check-ins? Call now...
>
> 2) It is a major leap of faith to assume a rules decision has already been
> made because someone asks a question in a single survey. After taking the
> recommended breath above, please take another one.
>
> W2LC mentioned that very few new contesters read this site. Frankly, I
> don't blame them based on what I've been reading of late. It's just a
> concept,
> but how about posting some useful information about contesting -- maybe
> just once in a while?
>
> 73, John, K1AR
> Your friendly co-moderator
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|