FWIW, I don't like this idea at all.
Maybe I'm just getting cranky as the days go by, but the idea of making a
change in the contest exchange because a programmer might find it easier to
program, well, offends me -- as not just a contester, but as a programmer, a
database analyst, and a network administrator.
It wasn't that long ago when someone (MARAC?) came up with a "standard" 4
letter code to uniquely identify, so it was said, every one of the 3077+
counties in the US... and it was still unwieldy. (And, as I recall, caused
some problems when some people tried to use them in other contests thinking
that they had already been imposed as a "standard" on all QSO parties)
Who'd impose this, anyway? Are you going to put a contest organizer into
Contest Jail for declining to go along with a silly idea (be it this one or
something else)? C'mon.
And... I fail to understand why some people seem to think everything, and I
mean everything, has to be "standardized." OK, so the exchanges in
different state/regional QSO parties may vary a bit. So what? What's wrong
with a little flavor, a little uniqueness?
Sorry. I don't buy the argument. And I don't believe we need to homogenize
our contest exchanges just to make them "easy."
...so you want to work people in two other contests at the same time you're
working your own? And your software won't handle it? Maybe that says
something about your over-reliance on computers... or using the wrong
software. Think about it...
73
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Matt Clauson
N0QXW
Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 12:08 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Repeating an idea from the 7QP soapbox...
I saw an early post in the 7QP soapbox[0] from Bob K0RC, and kind of
thought it should see the light of comments from here. Quoting...
> I propose the State QSO Party organizers begin serious consideration to
> standardize their contest exchange. There are 39 different QSO Party
> modules in my contesting program. One program author has discontinued
> support for these parties because of the cost/benefit ratio can't be
> justified. Support in the remaining programs is not stellar.
>
> A standard exchange of State + County by both in-state and out-of-state
> participants would allow multiple QSO Parties to run during overlapping
> time periods efficiently. Logs could be parsed and scored easily from
> the 3,077 "entities" in the US. In addition, this sets the stage for
> transporting the county information into your daily logging program.
Having working the 7QP for my second time (and dealt with a couple of
others) I think this is an OUTSTANDING idea. In addition to Bob's
comments, it would make the mental parsing of 'what data do I enter in
the log?' easier for 'new contesters'. As I try and bring more people
into contesting, even as a casual event (like I treat it a lot of the
time) having to seperate exchanges from NEQP versus InQP versus 7QP
versus MIQP can get a bit... offputting. Additionally, it makes life
at least slightly more 'standard' for those of us still blowing the rust
off of our CW skills. (yes, I promise, I'm getting better -- I'm even
thinking about participating in WPX/CW in a couple of weeks!)
Does it make things "easier"? Yes. Maybe it lessens the skill needed
to copy an exchange in CW, or log things properly. C'est la vie. But I
contend that it'll make things a little more friendly for 'newbies' to
enter. And, when they day is done and we're all sitting down to dinner
together at the next banquet, isn't Amateur Radio, in its highest form,
about fellowship and camaraderie?
Ok, enough of the soapbox, before I start to sound like I belong on
14.275. Back to net from N0QXW... Good day.
--mec
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|