CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Revised Rules

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Revised Rules
From: Richard F DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:16:36 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I have to say that I'm humored by the comments on packet. We're not talking about CQWW which drives the juices of DXers who love to collect entity counters. We're not talking about ARRL 10 or ARRL 160 which gets operators to focus efforts on challenging bands.

We're talking about a 12 hour QSO party that entails 50 states, about a dozen Canadian provinces, and maybe 12 DXCC entities in a given event.

Not every contest has to have 150 categories and overlays - Single Op, Low Power, Rookie, TB Wires, Single band 40.

Either operate in it or don't. I do and I find NAQP to be a great little event.

73 Rich NN3W


On 12/14/2016 10:22 AM, Kelly Taylor wrote:
I don’t mind it when a contest decides to not be like every other.

In some ways, packet is a scourge. Especially when used by lazy ops who put too 
much faith in the quality of spots and start dumping their calls onto a 
frequency without listening. Hang on, Mr. BY1, why is your signal strongest 
when I point my antennas at Jamaica?????

Note: I am NOT accusing anyone in this thread of that behaviour. Merely pointing out 
it exists. Nor am I complaining about packet’s existence or disparaging those 
who use it wisely.

If the rules say to be a single op you can’t use packet, my guess is more people obey than 
not. And if there are some who don’t, well, it’s only one contest out of hundreds. No 
big deal.

Has NAQP decided discouraging packet attracts more people than it turns away? 
Perhaps.

The ultimate protest is to vote with your feet. If that does or does not result 
in a large enough drop in participation to force a rules change, either way, 
the majority has spoken.

73, kelly, ve4xt

On Dec 13, 2016, at 10:04 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:

Working mults and using packet is a different skill set.  I know a lot of 
people that like it. Some like to work just mults, etc. To each their own.  
Spinning the dial doesn't teach me anything.

Packet is allowed in this contest . If you use it and you are a single op with 
one radio you get classified into a class of multi operator with two 
transmitters.  Once again they can do whatever they want.

If you want to not include packet then remove it for M2 as well or not.  
Apparently this contest needs packet but just not for Single Ops.  A bit of 
hypocrisy here don't you think?

What other contest dumps single ops into a M2 class because they use packet 
that has been in contesting for how many years now.

Congrats on having more participants that the contest can handle, no need to find new 
ways to keep people interested.   <Sarcasm off>  Back under my rock.

I am willing to be that many use packet anyway and turn in SO scores or they 
don't turn in scores.

W0MU





On 12/13/2016 8:22 PM, Tom Haavisto wrote:
There was some discussion about this issue some months ago here on CQ-Contest.  
The consensus was - no packet for single ops, and it seems like a great option. 
 *Every* contest does not need packet for single ops - just need to learn to 
spin the dial, or call CQ (a lot) to find those elusive mults!  Consider it a 
chance to improve your contesting skills.

Not sure why this (continuation) of the rules for single ops will suddenly 
discourage folks from getting on, as participation seems quite good with the 
current rules.

Next thing you know, single ops with one radio will complain about folks who have two 
radios/do SO2R, and state they need to be in a separate class :<evil grin>.

Tom - VE3CX


On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:51 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com 
<mailto:w0mu@w0mu.com>> wrote:

    So you either operate SO no assistance or you get stuffed into a
    M2?  There is no M1?  Why the bias against packet?  So If I want
    to use packet and chase mults all over I get dumped into a class
    where there are people using two transmitters at the same time?

    Explain to me how these changes or rules encourage people to get
    on?  What am I missing here?

    W0MU



    On 12/13/2016 1:55 PM, Chris Hurlbut wrote:

        The North American QSO Party rules have been revised!

        Current rules found here: http://ncjweb.com/NAQP-Rules.pdf
        <http://ncjweb.com/NAQP-Rules.pdf>

        Please take a moment to read them as there are some
        significant changes.

        Including, but not limited to:
        - Expanded multiplier list (Certain stations out east, rejoice!)
        - Off time rule clarification.
        - Output power clarification
        - M/2 classification clarification
        - Log entry deadline changed to 5 days

        Please pass this info along to any and all reflectors that may
        find it
        useful.

        Contest logging software authors, please update your NAQP
        multiplier lists
        where applicable.

        NAQP CW is January 14th, SSB is January 21st, and RTTY is
        February 25th!
        See you there!

        -Chris KL9A
        _______________________________________________
        CQ-Contest mailing list
        CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
        http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
        <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>


    _______________________________________________
    CQ-Contest mailing list
    CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
    http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
    <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>


_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>