I think all people who have nets or skeds should have an alternate
frequency (or several) planned in case their regular frequency becomes
occupied. What would they do if their favorite frequency and the
surrounding 10 kHz became occupied by the pileup end of a rare
DXpedition? Would they tell the DX to move? HA! How far would that go?
I also think this would be true for both sides in a contest. Providing
the contest station can hear a QSO in progress, they shouldn't attempt
to occupy the frequency.
Some QRM is always going to happen. The handling is just to be flexible.
73, Zack W9SZ
On 8/8/13, john@kk9a.com <john@kk9a.com> wrote:
> Perhaps you are a casual contester and have never experienced deliberate
> jamming from a net that is about to start on a frequency that you have
> occupied for hours. Sometimes they just demand that you QSY. Some
> non-contesters feel that because they meet regularly on a certain spot
> that they are entitled to this frequency. They are not! Many have a
> dislike for contesters. I personally have no dislike for non-contesters
> and I just feel that they should either adjust their operating frequency
> or use a non contest band. There is no reason to pick a fight just to make
> them aware of the regulations.
>
>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject:Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update
> From: David Gilbert
> Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:36:28 -0700
>
>
>
> Say what? Fight back?? The last thing contesters need is to get pig headed
> and pick a fight with other hams over agreements that have been in place
> for decades. We don't occupy less than 20% of weekend activity because
> anybody else is preventing us from using more of it, and to claim that we
> need to "fight back" to use more of it is profoundly absurd.
>
> You just made me embarrassed to be a contester.
>
> Dave AB7E
>
>
>
>
> On 08/07/13, w5ov@w5ov.com wrote:
>
> Since the WARC bands are contest-free bands, where's the balance?
>
> Where are the contesting-only bands?
>
> Of course, there are none. And, it would be absurd to presume that there
> should be.
>
> However, non-contesters are allowed to hold a similar absurd opinion and
> are in fact, encouraged by some to seek to have contest band segments
> established and the like in order to limit contest use of the bands.
>
> When will there be fairness? When will non-contesters realize that they
> have exclusive non-contest allocations and that they should stop
> complaining?
>
> Seriously, while there are contests pretty much every weekend, less than
> 10 weekends a year (less than 20% of the weekends) have major contests on
> them that dominate the bands and most of those are one mode at a time.
>
> Is less than 20% of the weekends really too much to ask for contesters ?
>
> Really?
>
> So, non-contesters get greater than 80% of the year without a major
> contest going on and they also get 3 (albeit small) bands where contest
> activity is precluded.
>
> Exactly how much would be enough for non-contesters? Hmmm?
>
> We need to fight back.
>
> 73,
>
> Bob W5OV
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|