I'm probably doing something incorrectly, but the last time
I tried to get the contest results from the Web, I could
only get them by category. Granted I'm usually interested
in how I did relative to others in my category and/or
state/section etc., but at least in QST I didn't have to do
several searches to get an overall grasp of who did what to
whom. Oh, well.
73, Bob AA0CY
-----Original Message-----
From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com]On
Behalf Of J. Edward (Ed) Muns
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 11:26 AM
To: RTTY Reflector
Subject: RE: [RTTY] RTTY Growth
> I don't know about other folks that don't submit, but
since the ARRL
> stopped publishing contest results, I lost my incentive to
take the time
> to submit my log. At my current QTH, I'll never get into
the Top Ten
> which now means I'll never get my station's call in _QST_.
This is a frequent comment about the ARRL's change of moving
contest results
from QST to the web. I certainly understand the
de-motivation to submit a
log if your results aren't going to be published. However,
our contest
results are still published ... on the web instead of on
paper.
Even though I am a life member of ARRL and have received QST
since the
1950's, I much prefer to review contest results on the web.
In fact, I
frequently review the Claimed Scores table of contests that
are on the ARRL
web site about a month after the contest ... typically a
year sooner than
results are published. I believe that we will see the final
results
published on the web site sooner than they have been in QST
and that this
should improve with time. A leading example of this is the
NA Sprints which
now have a log deadline of 7 days after the contest with
final results on
the NCJ web site 2 weeks after the contest.
So, in summary, all our results are still published ... that
didn't go away.
In fact, the publishing has improved with more timely
reporting and the
ability to access the results electronically for any
analysis one would like
to do. I think this is a great improvement, not a negative
step backwards.
Don't mean to be argumentative, but to offer a different
perspective by one
who sees this as a positive change.
73,
Ed - W0YK
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|