VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

[VHFcontesting] A suggestion for Limiting MultiOps [was: A suggestion fo

To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Subject: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for Limiting MultiOps [was: A suggestion for ERP-basedEntry Classes]
From: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:22:29 -0500
List-post: <mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
"Hoffman, Mark" wrote:
> 
> I believe that was his entire point. That it's EASIER to build a competitive
> station with fewer bands HAS taken away from the potential pool of uWave
> activity. If I can WIN M/L, and be a speck in the results as M/M - why
> bother with it?

And this is the wrong message to be sending when the ARRL is expending a
significant amount of effort in trying to protect our uWave bands.  Think about
this:

o Donate to the spectrum defense fund
o Create a contesting category that actually encourages you to NOT use spectrum

Both are ARRL activities, each of which works in opposition to the other.

Limited Multi Operator stations should be based on limiting the number of
operators, not the number of bands worked/submitted.  Don't sell-off our future
in exchange for the ability to score in a category that makes you artificially
competitive today.  Truth.

Ev, W2EV
-- 
PropNET: If the band is open and no one is TXing, does anyone hear it?
HamIM  : Messaging the all-ham way, find Rovers as they go to play.
         That HamIM, that HamIM -- I'm sure you'll like that HamIM.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ask me about either.  I'll send a URL and you can join the fun, too!

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>