[PaQSO] County Line Ops

[ed.miske at kennametal.com]

Blair et al:

I submit that the motive behind 90% or more of CL operations is to "give", 
not to "receive".

The thrill is in giving out more than one county to the other station, not 
to enhance the CL stations score. I agree there is little or no benefit to 
the CL station........maybe if the CL station is on the 
ARM/VEN/FAY/SOM/BED/TIO/JUN/ADA county line it would help a bit........ 

I can state for a fact the CL station rate is slowed. 

Anyhow, that's my story..........and I'm sticking to it.

Ed/WA3SES

paqso-bounces at mailman.qth.net wrote on 10/13/2005 04:10:59 PM:

> In a message dated 10/13/05 3:41:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> jss167 at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> << I may be in the minority here, but I do not like the
>  concept of county line operation.  You are either in
>  one county or the other. >>
> 
> I also could live without "county-line" operations.  I have worked many, 
but 
> have never considered doing portable or mobile operation from one of 
these 
> lines.  Even if an operator feels confident that his/her station 
> straddles the 
> line:
> A.  There is no point benefit to the CL station
> B.  The "rate" of the CL station is likely to be lower because of a 
longer 
> exchange to be sent and more requests for repeats.
> C.  Seldom are both counties equally rare.
> 
> If I wanted to activate adjacent counties, I'd be inclined to operate in 
one 
> as a mobile or rover, then move and activate the second.  I would be 
giving 
> others more points (more QSO's) and earning more myself 'cause I could 
work 
> stations a second time.
> 
> The biggest benefit of this possible change would be an END to the 
endless 
> debates about CL operation.  :-)
> 
> 73,  Blair k3yd
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PaQSO mailing list
> PaQSO at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso