[PaQSO] (no subject)

[Ron Notarius WN3VAW]

Cliff et al,

I think the short answer to your question is "no."  I don't think Harry's
letter raises more questions...

But before I say anything else, permit me a moment to establish my
credentials:  (feel free to skip the next paragraph)

I've been involved as a participant in the Pa QSO Party since 1975, either
on my own, or as a member of one of several clubs over these many years.  I
remember when the contest was in September, and we sat in the K3CR shack
listening to the S-Line with one ear and Fran Fisher on the AM Radio with
the other.  I remember W3HDH's first stint as QSO Party Chair, and hearing
from him first hand why the CW scoring in our little event is unique.  I
remember the hair pulling when the ARRL rescheduled the September VHF Party
to the PaQP weekend, which forced NARC to move our contest to October -- a
move which, in the long run IMHO made for a better contest and better
activity.  I remember when the ARRL then moved the "Open CD Party" to the
"new" Saturday night of PaQP, which surprisingly paid off when it opened up
all these new sections/multipliers on 40 and 75.  I remember when then-KC3CL
sat on a county line in the back of his pickup, and worked everyone twice,
allegedly moving from one county to the other by moving his chair across the
"county line" which allegedly ran across the back of his truck bed.  I've
climbed a ladder on my then-brother-in-law's trailer in Greene County with a
broken foot to get a longwire up, something I don't recommend to anyone.
I've sat in the driver's seat of my van in the future driveway of KX2A/3's
then-under-construction home for 9 hours to give out a rare county, instead
of staying home and comfortably running the regular station.  I've run
fixed, portable, mobile, single & multi-op, high & low power & some QRP.
I've run everything from an HT-37 to today's latest & greatest (sorry, I
don't recall W4ZE's rig model's offhand).  Etc. & so forth ad infinitum ad
nauseum.  So suffice to say, I've been around awhile.

So...

Is the Pa QSO Party in particular and the Nittany ARC in general perfect?
No, of course not.  But overall, I think it's fair to say that despite all
of the small tweaks that have been done over the years (and I've had my
gripes at one time or another too, who hasn't?), NARC has overall done an
excellent job administering the event.

It's unfortunate for all of us that Doug W3HDH had to -- twice -- take a job
out of state, depriving the PaQP of it's most passionate and most proactive
chairman in history.  The contest would not be what it is today were it not
for Doug.  And that is by no means meant to disparage any of the other
current or former chairs (especially my long-time friend K3CM).  One day, I
hope Doug will return to PA and be in a position to again, if he so chooses
and NARC so desires, take back the reigns.  Having said that, we've also
been very fortunate with the various contest chairs since Doug left us.
(Well, there is the one who kept kvetching after every one of my club
newsletters that I kept missing rule changes he had just posted, but besides
him...)

As I read his posted letter, I have the impression that KM3D has developed
other interests, and amateur radio has taken something of a back burner.  So
be it.  Harry, good luck to you, and I hope to work you again at some future
date, be it in a contest or whatever.  But I must, with respect, disagree
with much of your letter.  I won't argue the point(s), as I have the feeling
your mind is made up.  And frankly, if you think the rules for the PaQP are
bad, trust me, I've seen much worse.

I will say two more things, though.

First, Harry does have a point that sometimes the Nittany ARC isn't the
easiest group to approach about rules changes, modifications, and/or
clarifications.  (And I say that as a former NARC member, incidently).
That's not neccesarily bad.  It does seem to indicate that a compelling
reason needs to be made for changes, before they'll be considered.  So I
wouldn't be so swift to ask NARC to reconsider their policy on changes.

Second, if someone does think that the rules should be "clarified" -- ok, so
why not rewrite them?  What, you think NARC should do it?  Why should they?
If someone can rewrite the rules in such a way as to make them clearer and
easier to follow, and can make a good case to NARC to accept the rewrite,
I'm sure they'd give it the consideration it's due.  But to ask the
organization to do this without a darn good reason strikes me as a waste of
time. That may not be fair, but that's life.

Looking forward to next year already... hopefully under my own call, but if
not, under one of the WASH club calls!

73, ron wn3vaw

-----Original Message-----
From: paqso-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:paqso-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of cliff
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:06 PM
To: pa qso party
Subject: [PaQSO] (no subject)


I just saw some interesting reading on the  KM3D home page. Does this raise
more questions ?

                                            cliff wb3ivx
_______________________________________________
PaQSO mailing list
PaQSO at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso