Why the dates in May? Those dates were not noted as meeting dates, yet several
tasks have May dates?
Sent from my iPad
> On Feb 17, 2022, at 9:29 AM, rjairam@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> It was in the July 2021 CAC report:
>
> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ODV/Board%20Meeting%20July%202021/Document%2022%20Contest%20Advisory%20Committee%20Report.pdf
>
> Pages 11-12 are pertinent.
>
> Chas K3WW was on the CAC at that time so could probably provide further input
> as to the rationale. Zev N2WKS is also on the CAC.
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
>
>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 8:49 AM Jamie WW3S <ww3s@zoominternet.net> wrote:
>> was anyone, ANYONE, surveyed or asked about these changes prior to them
>> being enacted.....anyone ???? Bueller ?!?!?!?
>>
>> ------ Original Message ------
>> From: "Ron Notarius W3WN via CQ-Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
>> To: "rjairam@gmail.com" <rjairam@gmail.com>; "pete.n4zr@gmail.com"
>> <pete.n4zr@gmail.com>
>> Cc: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
>> Sent: 2/17/2022 8:42:06 AM
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL to allow self-spotting in contests
>>
>> >Regardless of the validity of the "nobody asked us" argument, there remains
>> >a perception (at least) that a minority of contest operators are making
>> >changes for their own sakes, and not necessarily for the improvement of the
>> >contest in question as a whole.
>> >And that these changes, some of which may actually be beneficial for all in
>> >both the short and long run, are being implemented whether or not other
>> >members of the worldwide contesting operators/community have a say in it...
>> >or if they have a say, are necessarily listened to.
>> >The result of this perception... and whether it is accurate or not is not
>> >the point... is that some operators will choose to simply not bother to
>> >operate a contest, or will scale back to casual operating rather than
>> >competitive operating, as they had done in the past. Which will result in
>> >a net loss in potential contest contacts for all. (Granted, some of that
>> >may and will happen whenever there is a change in the rules... I'm simply
>> >suggesting that it is more so when operators believe that their opinions
>> >are neither solicited nor considered)
>> >That's my observation on the situation. Take it into consideration as much
>> >or as little as you like.
>> >73, ron w3wn
>> >
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com>
>> >To: Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr@gmail.com>
>> >Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
>> >Sent: Thu, Feb 17, 2022 7:52 am
>> >Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL to allow self-spotting in contests
>> >
>> >It really isn’t the “nobody asked us” defense. Quite the opposite. There
>> >were several in the contest community who wanted contest rules out of the
>> >hands of the full Board and into the hands of the CAC and radiosport
>> >department. It doesn’t mean we don’t have input. It simply means that we
>> >don’t have a formal vote on every contest rule change.
>> >
>> >As for smaller S&P stations? I’m not sure what changes for you. Care to
>> >elaborate?
>> >
>> >I think a lot of us with smaller stations share frustrations of not being
>> >able to be competitive, for various reasons.
>> >
>> >
>> >Ria
>> >N2RJ
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:05 AM Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> But Ria, what about those of us with small stations who like assisted
>> >> S&P? Surely there should be room for those of us who don't want to
>> >> self-spot, but find unassisted S&P endless frustration. I'm with you -
>> >> surely it would have been better to add a class.
>> >>
>> >> As for the Board not having voted on these new rules, why the heck not?
>> >> Surely this isn't the "nobody asked us" defense? If the Board aren't
>> >> responsible for what people subordinate to you do, who is?
>> >>
>> >> 73, Pete N4ZR
>> >> Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network
>> >> web server at<http://beta.reversebeacon.net>.
>> >> For spots, please use your favorite
>> >> "retail" DX cluster.
>> >>
>> >> On 2/16/2022 9:11 PM, rjairam@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> > Hans, things progressed exactly as some of the harshest critics desired
>> >> it
>> >> > to go.
>> >> >
>> >> > But anyway, everything is in the minutes. There were no motions by the
>> >> > Board to adopt these rules.
>> >> >
>> >> > Do I agree with them? My desire was for an “ultra unlimited” category
>> >> to
>> >> > have streaming and self spotting. I didn’t get that. I’m one voice.
>> >> >
>> >> > Do we need to adapt and evolve? Yes.
>> >> >
>> >> > But I’m glad we kept unassisted, so those who desire legacy contesting
>> >> have
>> >> > their sandbox to play in.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ria
>> >> > N2RJ
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 8:53 PM Hans Brakob<kzerohb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Nice sidestep, Director.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 73, de Hans, KØHB
>> >> >> “Just a Boy and his Radio”™
>> >> >> ------------------------------
>> >> >> *From:*
>> >> CQ-Contest<cq-contest-bounces+kzerohb=gmail.com@contesting.com>
>> >> >> on behalf ofrjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com>
>> >> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 16, 2022 7:24:37 PM
>> >> >>
>> >> >> *To:* Ken Boasi<n2zn@rochester.rr.com>
>> >> >> *Cc:* Barry W2UP<w2up.co@gmail.com>; CQ-Contest Reflector <
>> >> >> cq-contest@contesting.com>
>> >> >> *Subject:* Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL to allow self-spotting in contests
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The full Board does not make a motion to adopt rules changes anymore.
>> >> >> This goes direct from the PSC to the radiosport department. There is a
>> >> >> PSC report that is adopted (in the consent agenda) but that's about
>> >> >> it. Also, the CAC is actually driving these rule changes now with the
>> >> >> PSC merely approving their recommendations.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Ria
>> >> >> N2RJ
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 4:43 PM Ken Boasi<n2zn@rochester.rr.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>> I’m not an ARRL apologist, but the CAC has been discussing this since
>> >> at
>> >> >> least a year ago, and made a recommendation for this change in their
>> >> July
>> >> >> meeting. You can look up the minutes on the ARRL website. It is task
>> >> >> 2020.5.
>> >> >>> I presume it was adopted in January at the ARRL Board meeting.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I am not in favor of the change, but I guess I had my chance to
>> >> comment
>> >> >> on this (like the rest of us) over the past year, and failed to do so,
>> >> >> either because I wasn’t paying attention, forgot to, or just assumed
>> >> that
>> >> >> “they would never do something like that”. Lesson learned…
>> >> >>> 73, Ken N2ZN
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> On Feb 16, 2022, at 3:35 PM, Barry W2UP<w2up.co@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> So which contest software will be the first to add, "self-spot
>> >> every
>> >> >> 15
>> >> >>>> seconds"?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Seems ARRL is back on its secrecy kick. I just renewed my ARRL
>> >> >> membership
>> >> >>>> for the 52nd year. It may be my last.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Barry W2UP
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 10:36 AM PY2NY<py2ny.vitor@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Good afternoon.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> I don't know exactly what to say or think about. My first
>> >> impression
>> >> >>>>> isn't good, including for those guys that are always "Assisted".
>> >> >>>>> DXCluster will have thousands of self-spots.
>> >> >>>>> Thanks God I'm always "no-Assisted"...
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> 73 DX and see you all next weekend.
>> >> >>>>> .
>> >> >>>>> ..
>> >> >>>>> ...
>> >> >>>>> --------------------------------
>> >> >>>>> PY2NY / SP9NY / V26NY - Vitor Luis Aidar dos Santos
>> >> >>>>> http://military-jeep-brasil.blogspot.com.br/
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Em qua., 16 de fev. de 2022 às 09:23, Randy Thompson <
>> >> >> k5zd@outlook.com>
>> >> >>>>> escreveu:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> From the ARRL Contest Update today:
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> "New Rules in effect for all ARRL HF Contests in June
>> >> >>>>>> Starting with the ARRL International Digital Contest, in all
>> >> >> categories
>> >> >>>>>> that allow assistance (Unlimited), the use of online and other
>> >> >>>>> non-amateur
>> >> >>>>>> radio platforms including but not limited to social media, live
>> >> video
>> >> >>>>>> streaming, and internet chat rooms will be allowed. In all
>> >> Unlimited
>> >> >> and
>> >> >>>>>> Multioperator categories, the prohibition of self-spotting, and
>> >> >> asking
>> >> >>>>>> another station to spot you, will also be removed."
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Wow. It was one thing for the VHF contests to allow use of chat
>> >> >> rooms
>> >> >>>>> and
>> >> >>>>>> telephone calls, now this is extended to all HF contests. It
>> >> should
>> >> >> be
>> >> >>>>>> interesting to see what unintended consequences result from
>> >> allowing
>> >> >>>>>> multi-ops and assisted competitors to spot themselves. You could
>> >> spot
>> >> >>>>>> yourself with every CQ if you wanted to. Or you can call people on
>> >> >> the
>> >> >>>>>> phone and ask them to get on the air. Or send out email reminders
>> >> to
>> >> >> work
>> >> >>>>>> you during the contest.
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> It is likely to have the most impact on SSB to produce spotting
>> >> >> equal to
>> >> >>>>>> what the RBN does for CW and RTTY.
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> For an organization that has always been so timid and conservative
>> >> on
>> >> >>>>> rule
>> >> >>>>>> changes, the ARRL seems to have sprung this one without much
>> >> >> consultation
>> >> >>>>>> with the contest community. I assume it is in reaction to the
>> >> W2RE
>> >> >>>>>> incident several years ago in ARRL DX where he used live streaming
>> >> on
>> >> >>>>>> Facebook during the contest.
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Randy K5ZD
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >> >>>>>> 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
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> 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
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >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
|