[Moon-net] ARRL Results

[Edward Cole]

I could live with separate CW/SSB and Digital contests.  So I propose 
the CW/SSB weekend be the same as a 432+ weekend (changed from 2.3 
GHz+) and the other two weekends be 50 & 144 MHz digital for the ARRL 
EME Contest.  That is apportioned pretty much by percentage of 
stations are active (based by the last ARRL contest results).

OK, I know that would not be welcome by the CW-only and forever 
folks...but just showing the difficulty of complying with your 
desires.  I will agree that the ARRL contest is in need of 
improvement (be nice if a board of review were established made up of 
eme'rs...that would likely avoid a lot of the errors and omissions).

I had an idea that might work:  have the logger sponsors turn-off 
their logger for the contest weekend.  If an assisted mode is still 
requested then one specific monitored and recorded contest logger 
would be designated.  Then any challenges to proper contest rules 
could be checked by a "blue-ribbon panel".

A contest version of JT65B that is minus the deep search subroutine 
could be designated (there would be a digital tag to identify its 
use).  That would eliminate several small and low-power stations from 
the contest as they would (probably) not have a chance at detection 
with the basic stripped version of JT65 sw.  That ought to kill EME 
outright then everyone will be "happy"! ;-)

73 Ed - KL7UW

At 04:49 AM 4/16/2008, Doug McArthur wrote:
>Dear YL and OM's  (I have waited years to say that!)
>
>I am absolutely devastated to learn that I have been stripped of my
>Single-Op Multi-Band 50-1296 MHz Mixed Mode Crown.
>I will now have to settle for a blow up replica of the QST Result
>Page displayed on the EME Shack wall to remind me of what could have been.
>
>The ARRL EME Contest was so simple in the past with a single mode
>category without the 144 categories that have evolved since Prague.
>
>It is said that 'you cannot make a silk purse out of a sows ear' and
>similarly to integrate the 144 possible mixed mode and operator
>clarification entry
>combinations shows the absurdity of the current ARRL EME Contest
>contrived Rules. Rules that were concocted to allow participation of a mode
>that requires, or benefits from readily available assistance other
>than information passed over the RF path. Who in their right mind
>would want to be on the
>Contest Committee tabulating the results? .. an impossible task as we
>all have witnessed.
>
>And out of all the 144 possible entry combinations I still cannot
>submit an entry for each band as well as a multiple band entry!
>
>I for one, resent being defined as "Analog" operator that has to
>declare that I operated "unassisted".
>I am a CW operator that operates in the time honored traditional
>Amateur manner.
>
>So in my view you have few choices if the ARRL Contest is to continue
>in its traditional and previously highly respected form.
>Separate  CW/SSB  from the other communication mode. (we have said it
>so many times before, but personal egos continue to negate commonsense)
>
>No Mixed Mode .. No assisted CW (nobody I know ever wanted it as it
>was just an insult anyway) and make any rules you
>like for assisted/unassisted WSJT as you wish (It happens now and it
>is not policed .. how can you .. nor acted upon)
>
>In other words .. give us back our CW EME Contest.  Run a separate
>Digital Contest.
>
>Get rid of the Mixed Mode assisted/unassisted folly ... or  the CW
>entries this year may surely be diminished .
>Who would now want to enter a Contest that is now clouded in such
>controversy? Many prominent EME operators have already voted with
>their feet and
>declined to post entries. The ARRL EME Contest reputation has sadly
>been tarnished since mixed modes were introduced.
>
>73 Doug VK3UM
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at 
>http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html