I did not realize there were as many folks as disappointed as I have been on
this issue. We had a great time mobileing around the state (16 counties),
and will continue to do so in the upcoming years. But the downside is
dealing with the time consuming task of the log. I vote for submission of
the summary sheets only.
Let's spend our time on the air, and make the reporting easy for everyone,
including Neal and the folks that tabulate the results for all of us.
73, -Don K4PK
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-secc@contesting.com [mailto:owner-secc@contesting.com]On
Behalf Of w4nti@mindspring.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 8:05 PM
To: secc@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [SECC] GQP and log formats
I have to agree. This emphasis on the new format for computer logs is
agrivating. I enjoy contesting, but I'm using the N3EQF log sample. It
does fine for me. Now I have to change out to a "cabrillo" format, whatever
that is.
I've actually considered dropping contesting totally because of this. As
I'm sure other's have also.
Just my opinion.
Dan/W4NTI
----- Original Message -----
From: <w3dya@juno.com>
To: <secc@contesting.com>; <stanreas@rev.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 6:18 AM
Subject: [SECC] GQP and log formats
> To: THE GQP "Contest" Committee:
>
> Although I've thoroughly enjoyed participating in the GQP the past two
> years as a mobile, and look forward to next year, I was disappointed at
> the recent exchange concerning future log formats.
>
> Not to the extent of skipping it next year, and certainly not nearly
> enough to make any complaints to the group sponsoring the GQP or checking
> the logs. They've done a great job of resurrecting the contest (I prefer
> to stress the "party" image).
>
> But I would like to suggest that the GQP committee give some thought to
> less checking and more "party" spirit. In my experience, I've never
> found a submitted log that contained anything wrong except for simple
> mistakes. And these never altered the results when corrected or deleted.
>
> I'd like to see state QSO party sponsors encourage acceptance of summary
> sheets only. I was told years ago that the Potomac Valley Radio Club
> quit asking for detail logs. I concede the ARRL, CQ, and other
> world-wide contests MAY warrant extensive log checking for integrity
> purposes - but an isolated state QSO party just doesn't seem to require
> it.
>
> I'm not sure why Neal referred to his professional programming experience
> in this context; the fact is, most people involved in contests are not
> programmers and couldn't care less about a Cabrillo format or what a
> programmer thinks about it. I think log checkers should be willing to
> accept a log in any format (as long as the paper isn't being
> recycled...); without logs it really isn't a contest!
>
> So I'll see you next year in GQP, and I'll even send in a log in any
> format required. But think summary sheet! you'll have more time to work
> on your antenna or mobile setup!
>
> 73, Norm, W3DYA
>
> PS: Although it's of no significance in this discussion, I was a
> programmer/manager for over 27 years before I retired a few years ago.
> Good users were more important than programmers then, and I don't think
> that's changed!
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/seccfaq.html
> Submissions: secc@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: secc-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-secc@contesting.com
> Search: http://www.contesting.com
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/seccfaq.html
Submissions: secc@contesting.com
Administrative requests: secc-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-secc@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/seccfaq.html
Submissions: secc@contesting.com
Administrative requests: secc-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-secc@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com
|