The cluster has been around for a long time, so there is not a need to
"test what will happen". Rather than mess with the NAQP, perhaps a new
contest could be set up. Users must NOT use their VFO - can only click on
spots. Only robot QSO's allowed. And any other rules the folks who want
to run the contest want to put into the rules. Then, publish on the web,
and see what happens.
If the rules look reasonable, and I am available, I may come out and play.
Or I may not. Same as any entrant in any other contest.
And that is the bottom line. Perhaps at some point, the folks who run the
NAQP will decide its dying, and "lets add packet to breath new life into
it". From the sound of things, that day is not here yet, and folks are
happy to leave it the way it is. Who knows - maybe in 20 years, a whole
new breed of contesters will enjoy the "retro" aspect of the NAQP, and opt
to keep it in its current format... Or not.
If packet is the ONLY way folks know how to enter a contest, just look at
the contest calendar. Lots of contests to choose from where packet IS
already allowed Or - enjoy the NAQP as it currently exists, use the
cluster (if that is what is needed), and enter as an M2. Seems simple
enough.
>From the look of this thread, folks seem happy with the NAQP in its current
format.
Tom - VE3CX
On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Mike Smith VE9AA <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> Because Tom, it changes the whole dynamic and mechanics of the contest.
>
> Right now, rare sections will be discovered by all single ops by spinning
> the VFO and using their ears.
>
>
>
> If there were to be a SO(A) category instituted, rare sections would always
> (or usually) have a "packet pileup" on them.
>
> The unassisted op is no longer rewarded for being a sharp fox with elephant
> ears due to the fact assisted ops and the massive worldwide RBN
>
> feeds beats them to the punch in 99% of cases.
>
>
>
> It used to be, the sharp ops found the most mults by THEMSELVES. Now ,
> anyone with a telnet feed can find the mults..
>
>
>
> Mike VE9AA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I have subscribed to the "boy and his radio" idea since I started ham
>
> radio in 1975, and have never been much of a fan of packet. I have
>
> always likened it to spoon feeding. However, I have a question to
>
> those who have expressed their opposition to it in this thread:
>
> If a separate SOA category was created for NAQP, how would that
>
> detract from the enjoyment of operating the contest for those
>
> who choose to run under the SO category? I can't see how it would
>
> change anything as far as the actual mechanics of the contest is concerned,
>
> other than it might incite a few people who would not otherwise participate
>
> to join in, meaning more QSO's for the SO ops. The only thing it would
>
> change
>
> would be to move numbers from one section of the score results to another.
>
> The ops who are at the top of the heap in the scores are still going to be
>
> there, no matter what category they are in, because they have better
>
> operating skills and better stations.
>
>
>
> Let the assisted stations fight it out amongst themselves, it matters
>
> not a wit to me.
>
>
>
> K0SN
>
>
>
> Mike, Coreen & Corey
>
> Keswick Ridge, NB
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|