[ILQSO] Questions from your neighboring QSO Party

[n9jfcountyhunter at gmail.com]

Hi Clint, thanks for your e-mail  regarding ILQP.  I'll try to respond to each issue.

The first item, which applies to several of your questions, is in regard to entry classes.  We have tended to not do a lot of splitting of classes because additional classes implies additional awards, which, if it leads to additional plaques, begs for sponsors, of which we have a limited number so far.  And we appreciate every one of them! 

As is the case with many contests, the bottom line would be, "If you wish to sponsor a plaque for an additional entry class, we can talk.  Please consider what that sponsorship would entail and if you would wish to do so for a single year or in perpetuity."
This would include splitting bands, modes, power levels, operator numbers, and a host of other variables.

Regarding multi-operators, you are correct: As long as the "one simultaneous signal rule" is followed, we don't care how many operators are involved. The desire is that club groups would use ILQP as a training opportunity for new hams and others interested.  If there have been complaints, I haven't heard them or have forgotten them.  Age has its advantages....

There have been few "unlimited" entries.  I'll be better able to respond to this question after I finish analyzing this year's logs.  Again, the hope is that a club group would use this as a way to involve more individuals.  There are no awards for this group....yet...see earlier remarks regarding sponsorship.   We MAY recognize Unlimited entries with digital certificates, but that remains to be decided.

Regarding county lines, "as close as possible" and "slippery slopes", I have given up making everyone happy with this.  We have determined that some "county corners"  ARE NOT.  Those have been dealt with on a case-by-case basis.  I think.  See first sentence of this paragraph.   The "no wet lines" is a holdover from MARAC county hunting rules and seems appropriate to this old person.

Hope this helps a little. I will entertain thoughtful discussions from interested parties but make no promises regarding intelligent responses as I am still collecting logs and getting ready to score them.
73, Jim N9JF

.......

Hi,
I’m the Iowa QSO Party Chairman, sponsored by the Story County Amateur Radio Club, and we are considering some class adjustments. Please indulge me with some inquiries about how you run your QSO party.

Our council likes your mobile/portable/rover designations and noticed you don’t address multi operators anywhere in your rules. I’m assuming you don’t care as long as they comply with your “one transmitted signal” rule. Have you found any issues with that stance? Complaints about unfairness?

How’s the Unlimited class working out? Anything unexpected happen there?

For county lines, we have taken a hard stance on close enough is not good enough as we are concerned it could become a slippery slope. If you can’t get portion of your vehicle or station physically in each county because of roads, property access, etc, it’s not possible to operate there. Do you have any issues with your “as close as possible“ guidance?

Thanks, I appreciate your insight!


Clint Miller, KØGR, COML, COMT

Story County Emergency Coordinator

Amateur Radio Emergency Service

www.storyares.org<http://www.storyares.org/>
______________________________________________________________
ILQSO mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ilqso
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:ILQSO at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html