KR2Q commented:
> ...can compete in their own catagory with a chance for "glory" or a listing
in CQ, or >"recognition", or some paper, as compared to those who are doing
the same thing.
---------------------------------------------
I wholeheartedly agree with comment. However, I think this might be the very
thorn that started me thinking about the SOA/SOU thing in the first place.
Y'know, when a good, honest, competitive SINGLE BAND / single op wants to run
with packet and chooses SOA (as he should), he suddenly finds himself
competing against the big guys again, because he MUST now enter as ALL BAND.
SOA does not permit single band entries, and this rule just doesn't make
sense.
I have been carefully studying the responses to my first posting, and
although there were a few nasty things said, they were, frankly, just a few.
Most responses were quite articulate (even friendly) and all of it got me
thinking that maybe there ARE some reasons to separate the categories. Then,
while pondering about the house this weekend, it hit me: I often enter single
band/single op, and I am forced to keep the packet station closed down - and
that bothers me a lot because I have friends on packet, things go up for sale
(even during the contests), qsl routes are passed along, and I get a real
thrill operating with all my ports running full bore, from the octopus CT. I
wouldn't mind running SOA if I could still operate on just one band, if
that's what I choose, where I might stand a clear chance of winning some
paper to put on the wall, etc.
And in a few other contests, running packet puts you - unbelievably - in the
multi-op category! That's just plain ridiculous. So, I will acquiesce for now
on this topic, but I hope you contest administrators will at least seriously
consider the idea of keeping SOA a separate SO category, with all the
identical sub-categories, rather than changing the entire game for the single
ops who enjoy using packet. After all, the opinions expressed so far (even
including those who blasted me) clearly indicate that no advantage
whatsoever has been reflected in the scores of SOA's. It's just the principal
of the thing, it seems. Please reconsider!
Thanks & 73 de Jeff WA2SYN
wa2syn@aol.com
>From Steve Miller <millersg@dmapub.dma.org> Fri Sep 30 00:21:19 1994
From: Steve Miller <millersg@dmapub.dma.org> (Steve Miller)
Subject: Sweepstakes ALL-TIME Records
Message-ID: <m0qqUmv-00014fC@dmapub.dma.org>
>
> I'm looking for the most recent summary of Sweepstakes ALL-TIME records. The
> latest I can find is in Sep/Oct 1991 NCJ, which does not include 1991, 1992 or
> 1993. Anyone know where I can find the list that goes up through 1993?
>
> 73, Ken, AB6FO KWIDELITZ@DELPHI.COM
>
This info through 1992 is available in the CQ 1994 Amateur Radio Almanac.
Records for several other contests are included. Available through CQ
Communications. 73, Steve
--
+==============================================================+
| Time keeps on slippin' | Steve Miller (the other one) WD8IXE |
| into the future .... | Box 340277 Beavercreek, OH 45434 |
| (Steve Miller) | Email: millersg@dmapub.dma.org |
+==============================================================+
>From Tim Coad" <Tim_Coad@smtp.esl.com Fri Sep 30 01:59:28 1994
From: Tim Coad" <Tim_Coad@smtp.esl.com (Tim Coad)
Subject: Voice PED
Message-ID: <n1431260664.20501@smtp.esl.com>
Subject: Time:5:58 PM
Can someone send me the latest info on how to get a copy of PED for SSB?
Tim - NU6S
|