Ed, I think it's extremely premature for you to attack the idea so early
on. A decade ago, when a few of us started to advocate the
establishment of this category, we ran a survey asking (on
contesting.com) whether people would operate more, less or be unaffected
if such a category were available. At that time, IIRC, something better
than 3:1 said they would operate more rather than less.
What the impact may actually have been will require analysis of log
data, and will probably require more than one year's experience to
judge. Was I surprised to see a few of those calls? You bet. Does it
mean a negative effect? Hardly.
73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
http://reversebeacon.net,
blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
For spots, please go to your favorite
ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.
On 11/28/2013 2:16 PM, Edward Sawyer wrote:
After seeing literally more than a dozen well known contesters in each mode
"opt down" for the 24 hours of Classic and others commenting they may try it
next year, I have to ask - is it doing what was intended? Seems to be a
nice choice for those who feel inclined at the moment but taking 40+ hour
contesters down to 24 hours is not "helping contesting" necessarily, folks.
Maybe there are lots of people "opting up" to 24 hours who used to do 10 or
15 hours, I don't know. But it does not seem to be "achieving expectations"
collectively, from where I sit. Maybe the positive results are just not
obvious.
73
Ed N1UR
_______________________________________________
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
|