Hi,
Regarding the new Rover class rules for VHF contests:
First a compliment to the ARRL. The new rules, if I am interpreting them
correctly are a great improvement over the previous set of rules. I see
nothing here that should make anyone who is interpreting the new rules in
the same way I am even begin to think about quitting roving or VHF
contesting in other classes.
Allowing for driver(s) separate and in addition to operators is a plus for
safety. Having grid circlers competing with themselves is also a plus.
On the other hand creating a Limited Rover class, while it may be good for
the contests, is not in the long term best interests of Amateur Radio as a
whole. Like the Limited Multi-Operator class it provides an incentive for
not operating on all the bands possible. I was against the Limited Multi-Op
class for that reason and I am against the Limited Rover class for the same
reason. Maybe if there were a lifetime limit of five entries in the Limited
classes I might be convinced they were good for both Ham Radio and
contesting.
But my real beef with the rules for all Amateur Radio contests is that they
are too confusing. Since the offical rules for each contest are now on line,
not in QST, there is no reason for having the rules divided up and published
in (often conflicting and always confusing) parts. The rules for a contest
like the June VHF Contest should be in
one place, in one peice, and internally consistant. Further if there is a
question which requies a letter, an email, or a posting to a reflector,
which adds, subtracts, modifies, appends, deletes, or otherwise effects the
rules in any way, that change should have to be made a part of the rules to
have any effect on the participants. The way such are handled now some
people know of the opinion(s) and obey it (them), some know of it (them) and
ignore it (them) because they know they can claim not to know, and some
simply don't know what the rules really are. Every effort should be made to
have the published rules be as clear as possible. Any such opinion published
as a letter, email, or posting should be in effect for only one contest,
after that if it isn't incorporated into the rules (where everyone will see
it and have to follow it) it should be as if it was never written.
Certainly some of the new Rover rules are not all that clear in their
intent. The number of questions already raised on the reflectors shows this
clearly. It would be far better to rewrite the rules to say what is really
intended than rely on more opinions that not everyone will know about or
see.
While we are on the topic of confusion regarding the rules, I have one more
gripe. These rule changes were all published very recently. They were not in
effect during the 2007 September VHF QSO Party; or at least the announcement
in the August QST did not mention them. On the ARRL's web site the 2007
September rules have been changed to show the new rules. If the ARRL wants
to list this as tentative 2008 rules it can and should do so. But to change
the 2007 rules after the contest is over and still call them 2007 rules is
very confusing and very wrong. It is exactly the kind of confusion they
should be doing everything they can to prevent.
Remember also that the new rules are just that- new. They have precedence
over old rules and old opinions. The new rules appear to make the use of
HamIM illegal. Old rules and opinions would have no effect on this because
they are, well, old. This is exactly the kind of thing that should be
handled by having the correct interpretation written into the rules, not by
sending a message to the reflector. (Note: I said "appear to", I have no
opinion on whether that was the intention of the writers of the new rules.)
By the way, do Unlimited Rover class scores count towards club score totals?
As I remember it, if it wasn't for club score totals being overwhelmed by
grid circling rovers, there wouldn't have been nearly as much controversy
over grid circling in the first place.
73,
Jim W0EEA at w0eea.com
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|