I believe that Tommy has some very good ideas, and I'll try to
incorporate them into the "rules".
73
Ed
Tommy wrote:
>
> I agree with the 'first come, first serve' issuance of W4AN, however I would
> suggest a time limitation for requesting it. Such as one can only request
> the call say, 30 or 45 days before the specific contest, and that there be
> no long-term nor repetitive request. Meaning W4AN can not be requested for
> every specific annual contest.
>
> In order for everyone to have the opportunity to use the call, I would limit
> the use of the call to any one station to twice per calendar year, unless no
> one else request use of it. For instance, if I use W4AN for the CQ WW and
> the NAQP in the same year, I can not use it again that year unless no one
> else request it.
>
> I disagree that rovers or anyone in the SECC should have any priority over
> anyone else.
>
> I disagree that there should be any restrictions placed on the contest use
> of the call. Bill was a very serious competitor and had no restrictions
> placed on him and I highly doubt he would approve of any exceptions being
> placed on the use of his call in any contest. As an avid contester, I'm sure
> he fully understood that records are made to be broken.
>
> I believe the SECC tries too much to legislate what one can do in contest,
> such no mode category in the GQP. If having mode categories makes the
> scoring 'too difficult', then perhaps the GQP should be dropped. If we can
> not manage the entire contest, as other states do, we should not sponsor one
> at all. I know getting folks to volunteer to help is very difficult, but
> maybe some prior planning could be done so that not one, but several of us
> do the scoring, and then submit our results to one central person for
> overall checking. I also think, that in today's world of instant
> communications, we should impose a 90 limit on having GQP scoring completed
> and posted on the web site. I also believe it is not realistic to ask one
> person to manage the GQP. Not picking on Jeff, but he is a good example of
> being highly interested in promoting the GQP, but like most of us, he has a
> home life that must and should take priority over his hobby activities. Is
> it not possible to have a GQP Director and two or even three assistance's,
> so that some of the work can be shared?
>
> I do understand the importance of rover's, especially in the GQP primarily
> because of the lack of ham participation from Georgians. But one has to be
> careful and not tell home stations that GQP representation is not important
> for one county only. I know that is not the intent, but that really is what
> is being said.
>
> Tommy
>
> W4BQF
|