[PaQSO] PAQSO Party Changes

Bill G. K3SV k3sv at pa.net
Wed Dec 7 23:06:32 EST 2005


I don't have a real problem with changing the rules to get more 
interest, although I don't see any need to generate more interest. 
Consider the fact that the PAQSO Party is one (if not the number one) 
QSO party that has stood the test of time.

Possibly the most active QSO party with maybe a close runner being the 
CAL QSO Party (and maybe they would be number one). I've always 
considered the CAL party as the "sister" party to the PA QSO party 
because of the level of activity and the contest dates. When you look at 
the CAL party rules, they are concise and straight forward, not alot of 
"frills" just basic rules for a competitive contest. CW and Phone, keep 
it simple, it ain't broke, don't fix it approach.

I suspect someone will sponsor a trophy or plaque for the digital modes 
and someone will claim the prize, that said, no harm done. If you're 
equipped to run RTTY, you can run 100 per hour, not quite up to the CW 
or phone rates, but 100 per hour is not hard to do if the stations are 
calling you. I doubt that 10 per hour will hit many operators rate 
meter. If you look at top operators QSO totals, they won't have much 
time or incentive to check the digital modes for big numbers of "fresh 
meat" as it's called.

Will I stop operating the QSO party, nope, I really look forward to it. 
I'll operate CW only, or Phone and CW and have fun with everyone else 
that weekend. I support the sponsors and the club that runs the Party, 
and if the log checkers and bean counters want to keep track of the 
added classes and entry categories....more power to 'em. Having scored 
and judged contests, I don't envy the task.

I think the QSO Party has a life of it's own and will live on for many, 
many years.  73 Bill


More information about the PaQSO mailing list