Hi all....Am thinking of putting up a Hygain Hytower Jr ...model 18-jr
Wondering if anyone has comments and thoughts on its effectiveness...I
already have slopers for 40m and 80m but am thinking more toward some
diversity for the upcoming CQWW....any input wud be appreciated.
Randy N1KWF >>
>From mwdink@eskimo.com (Michael Dinkelman) Thu Oct 3 16:02:13 1996
From: mwdink@eskimo.com (Michael Dinkelman) (Michael Dinkelman)
Subject: lack of enthusiasm to cheaters
Message-ID: <199610031507.IAA13926@mail.eskimo.com>
From:
> VO1MP
> Gus Samuelson
>
>Am surprized at the lack of enthusiasm being shown for this topic !
>I have been sitting back for a while and wondering when the realistically
>demonstrable effects of packet monitoring are going to be analysed.
>
I have been watching this thread and it resembles most threads
previously based on the same subject. I finally have to open my own big
mouth. Sorry.
While an interesting subject and certainly volatile - the basic
problem comes down to this fact. There are so many ways to circumvent
the
system and so many permutations to the way individuals are using
packetclusters
during a contest that there will NEVER be any method (other than direct
observation) of validating anybody's claim to a particular use. It's
wasted breath (just like this diatribe) and serves no purpose other than
to keep the flames high.
What it really comes down to... is honesty - which is a
difficult concept to accept in competive endeavors. Since we have been
relying on that premise of honesty (some more so than others) since
contesting was born, maybe it's just time to let the cheaters cheat
(except where real checks exist) and let the rest of us go about our
lives in blissful serendipity (my testosterone levels must be low this
morning). There are few cheaters that don't slipup somewhere given
enough time and opportunity. Then, that person is simply ostracized -
forever (real forever - not the professional sports kind
which I think lasts about 3 weeks).
Until then, I can't wait until Sweepstakes (the CW edition of
course). Remember... contesting is supposed to be fun.
73, Dink
Dink
Michael Dinkelman
the almost former WA7UVJ
Kent, WA
mwdink@eskimo.com
>From rfargo@halcyon.com (Ron Fargo) Thu Oct 3 16:46:46 1996
From: rfargo@halcyon.com (Ron Fargo) (Ron Fargo)
Subject: CQWW CW 95 errors
Message-ID: <199610031546.AA03673@halcyon.com>
Just to set the record straight, submitting one's scores does'nt always work
out. Last
year entered contest as Single Op all band "Assisted". But in the case of
others here
in W7 land I was entered in the Single Op all band catagory by mistake. The
outcome of
several catagories were effected by these errors. So just in case you heard
me call the
DX stations after they were announced on packet you heard correctly as I was
"Assisted".
I realize that a huge amount of data must be collected and processed to
score a contest
of this size. I sure hope the CQWW scoring folks pay a little more attention
to the
cover sheets this year. Even out west in the "Black Hole" of the CQWW
contest world
this is a great contest. See you this year "Assisted" again. 73 de Ron.
Ron Fargo - Sr. Field Engineer - National Computer Systems
Internet - rfargo@halcyon.com or rfargo@ncs.com
Ham Radio TCP/IP Network - aa7cq@aa7cq.ampr.org (44.24.100.34)
Our band's Web page is at:
http://www.halcyon.com/rfargo/cydonia2.htm
|