VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] Endorse Rover Rules Revisions EXCEPT the 30 Q Limit

To: VHF Contesting eMail Remailer <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Endorse Rover Rules Revisions EXCEPT the 30 Q Limit
From: Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: w2ev@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:14:34 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
--- On Tue, 2/17/09, Steve Clifford <k4gun.r@gmail.com> wrote:
> That tongue in cheek proposal makes absolutely no sense. 
-------------------------------------------------------------

Steve, I feared that my attempt at making a point through irony would get lost 
along the way.  I'll boil it down and move on...

Rovers should be scored (and categorized, btw) the same way that everyone else 
is.  Barring that...*any* proposal that artificially limits the number or 
percentage of qualified Rover-to-Rover QSO's is bad.  Very bad.

Our hobby is based on communicating and advancing the art/science of 
communication.  Do not "decree" limits on Rover communications.  There is no 
similar limitation for non-Rovers.  Treat all participants similarly.

Wishing you the best,
Ev, W2EV



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

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