Amen, Steve - what a shock for those who hoped that changes among
directors and new CEO who contests would improve things in Newington.
73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now
spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.
On 10/23/2020 5:41 PM, Steve London wrote:
Here's the translation for how this went down....
Some European contesters, who probably aren't ARRL members, really
like the idea of having IARU-contest HQ-like stations in other
contests. They use their supposed concern over COVID to push for their
goal.
The ARRL PSC, without consulting their own Contest Advisory Committee
(CAC), agreed to some poorly thought-out guidelines, many of which
make no sense.
The ARRL announces this on the day of CQWW SSB, clearly as a slam on
the CQ Contest Committee (see W7VO's "noting that the CQ committee....").
If the ARRL really gave a damn about COVID, these guidelines would
apply immediately to all ARRL contests. I'm sure the excuse is that
it's too late to get it in QST for SS, ARRL 10 or ARRL 160. Since the
printed copy of QST no longer publishes the rules, but only has a web
link to the rules, that's malarkey.
73,
Steve, N2IC
On 10/23/2020 12:47 PM, Michael Ritz wrote:
The request for this "COVID-19 one-year variance" for the ARRL
sponsored contests originated from a group of EU contesters and
through the Radiosport department at ARRL HQ. It then went on to the
Board's Programs and Services Committee, which approved the temporary
change in a meeting held this Wednesday. While noting that the CQ
committee has not made any allowances for COVID in their test rules,
the motion passed and here we are.
The rationale: Not every club station in the world has the ability to
operate with a bunch of remote operators, the guys in Maine aside!
This gives some of the EU club stations the chance to get on the air
under their "normal" club callsign, despite the pandemic, and be part
of a MM team.
I am somewhat prejudiced here, which is why I supported it. I'm one
of the believers that radiosport is best when it's done as part of a
team effort, especially if you can get some new hams involved as part
of the team. (You did read the article in the latest NCJ didn't you?)
;-)
This is actually similar to what the ARRL did as an allowance for FD
this year. There were hams that hated the idea of what we did then,
and some that loved it. In any case, overall participation in that
event was up over last year, despite the pandemic, and in my books
that's a good thing. I'm sure there are critics over this decision
also, but so be it. You run with whatever the contest rules are at a
particular time, they are subject to change.
If you want to run MM in the ARRL DX CW test with 15 ops crammed into
a single room, have at it. Nothing is going to stop you from still
doing that. If you have 15 ops all remoting in from homes all over
the globe to a multi-band 5X5X5 stacked array located in Jonesport,
Maine, you can still do that too. This provides a third option "for
the time being". Whatever floats YOUR boat.
"Who will enforce this rule?" You guys will. Will somebody figure out
a way to game the system? Most likely. There's no big prize money
here, and the vast majority of radiosport enthusiasts are honest
people. Let's just get on the air, have fun, and get over this damn
virus.
73;
Mike
W7VO
ARRL Director, NW Division
Member, ARRL Programs and Services Committee
(and contester too!)
_______________________________________________
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
|