Quite simply put - several large m/m stations have canceled their operations.
By allowing them to stay at home and use the same call, but follow ALL
(every single one) of the existing M/M rules, they can still play. So,
it is more of an opportunity to play than is otherwise possible during
these special circumstances. Therefore, more will play than were going
to, because now the risk (and in some cases, government mandates) that
prevented M/M gatherings are now taken off the table.
Hope that was clearer.
Also, as I mentioned, 20 operators on at once is a bit of a stretch.
They can't have more than one signal per band, so unless they network
up everybody and interlock them over the internet there will be at
most 4-5 because that's what open bands will accommodate.
Let me ask another question - is change, especially one that is
temporary in response to a global crisis really a bad thing? Is it
that we want to stick to the rules no matter what even if it means
less enjoyment for fewer people? Or do we try to make the best of a
bad situation?
73
Ria, N2RJ
On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 9:59 PM Hans Brakob <kzerohb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I apparently didn’t do a good job of framing my question.
>
> First, we’re not discussing affiliated club competition.
>
> Now, my question.
>
> You asserted that this arrangement gives “more people the opportunity to
> play”.
>
> I don’t understand how that is true.
>
> To illustrate, I’ll use W0AIH as the M/M that I have experience with.
> Typically Paul and Mary would host 15-20 contesters over the course of a CQWW
> or ARRL DX weekend. Some would come for a single shift of a few hours,
> others bunked for the whole weekend and sat multiple shifts, either as a run
> operator or a mult/spot operator. They came from a geographic area much
> larger than a 100km circle. On average, 6 to 9 chairs might have butts
> installed at any given time.
>
> For calculation purposes, let’s say that 20 operators would have worked from
> W0AIH in the 2021 ARRL DX CW test.
>
> Under this temporary arrangement, these 20 operators will now be able to stay
> home and operate, all under the W0AIH call. That doesn’t sound like “more
> opportunity”. At best it sounds like “break even” at best.
>
> But “break even” is mythical in this case.
>
> 1) Not all those 20 operators’ home stations are inside the arbitrarily
> restricted circle.
> 2) Not all those 20 stations are “wired up” for remotely sharing their their
> log. (Even if they were in the circle.)
> 3) Coordinating “whose butt is in which chair on what band” (even if they are
> in the circle), including the ability to fill an unexpected vacant chair on
> the fly (equipment failure?) would seem an immense challenge, and consume the
> attention of one or more experienced m/m people who otherwise would be
> butt-in-chair.
>
> Given those and other challenges which I haven’t thunk up yet, I haven’t
> grasped how this scheme is congruent with your claim of “more opportunity”.
>
> 73, de Hans, KØHB
> “Just a Boy and his Radio”™
> ________________________________
> From: rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2020 7:51 PM
> To: Hans Brakob
> Cc: n2ic@arrl.net; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX Contest Multioperator Station Guidelines
>
> A one year exception, an accommodation, just like field day where we
> allowed home stations to treat it like any other contest and added
> affiliated club competition.
>
> Look at the CQWW results on 3830 this year. Probably just going to be
> team RHR and a couple of others, and maybe some who entered M/M to
> free themselves from M/S rules. Is that fun?
>
> "As an example, a group of Minnesota Wireless Assn (Est. 1910)
> operators could all stay home and sign “W0AIH” for the weekend instead
> of using their own personal call."
>
> Except that there will be no dupes allowed, all log software
> networked, and realistically one per band. There are 6 bands maximum
> they can play on. Multiple signals on each band still prohibited, so
> realistically at most 4-5 ops at a time. It will be quite different
> from affiliated club competition.
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 8:38 PM Hans Brakob <kzerohb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > How is that so?
> >
> > This scheme allows a group of scattered operators to operate from their
> > home station as a geographically distributed “multi op” using a common call
> > sign.
> >
> > As an example, a group of Minnesota Wireless Assn (Est. 1910) operators
> > could all stay home and sign “W0AIH” for the weekend instead of using their
> > own personal call.
> >
> > These are the same operators who, pre-COVID, would have gathered at “The
> > Farm” for the weekend.
> >
> > How does this give “more people the opportunity to play”?
> >
> > 73, de Hans, KØHB
> > “Just a Boy and his Radio”™
> > ________________________________
> >
> > rjairam@gmail.com writes:
> >
> > > This accommodation gives more people the opportunity to
> > > play this go around.
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|