[PaQSO] 07 PAQSO Special Event Station news

[Michael Coslo]

Since this one went to the list, I'll reply there.


On Apr 5, 2007, at 2:41 PM, William N. Goodman, CPA wrote:

> I think the idea is dumb!  A special event station should be one  
> station at
> one location, in one county, not many stations.  Next year we can  
> ALL enter
> as W3P.  How silly.  Go back to the original intent, which was to  
> have one
> station using a club or special call.

The original Special event station was at the Columbus Chapel in  
Boalsburg, PA, run by W3YA. The multiple station concept was  
introduced in 2003. It has proven to be popular. There is no  
particular philosophy behind the selection or operating conditions of  
the special event station. I just continue to stand on the shoulders  
or the giants that came before me. If we were to have a strict  
competitive policy, there would be no special event station  
whatsoever. Why should anyone get 200 points for one single QSO? Ever?


> This is out of hand, and one of the
> reasons I abandoned the PA QSO Party.  I speak from experience  
> after we set
> a new multi multi record as W3FRC from K3ANS and many years of top  
> scores,
> single op at K3ANS.

	I address this below.


>   I also think adding all of the new classes has diluted
> the intent of the contest.  It was supposed to demonstrate the station
> building and operating skills of high rate QSOs with many multipliers.

	The PAQSO Party is a party, not a contest. We have awards and such  
but we are first and foremost a party. We advertise ourselves as "The  
Friendly QSO Party", and we mean it. Here you'll see blatantly non  
competitive actions such as giving up a frequency to another Op, or  
allowing another Op to get that rare county that he or she hear us  
working on our run frequency. From a strictly competitive standpoint  
that is stupid. Why help your competitor? That person you let contact  
the rare county might beat you by one QSO in the end! It only makes  
sense if you see the party as a fun weekend. There are certificates  
and plaques, and awards for working all counties. But overall, the  
idea is to have fun, and to promote some ideals that we can compete  
with each other without being cutthroat about it. It is about  
winning, but it is also about having a good time while doing it.

	And that will not change!


> Now
> you have so many categories to make all participants happy, it  
> reminds me of
> socialism.  All participants win.  Do not let any ham be left  
> behind. Do not
> hurt the feelings of the incompetent.

All participants do not win. Perhaps 20 percent get a certificate or  
something like that. One club wins a trophy, four get certificates. A  
few people get all 67 counties. The idea is that you look at that  
certificate on the wall and think "I really had a good time that  
weekend", not "I really showed those other Jerks just who rules 40  
meters!" I am competitive by nature, and I know the thought process.

	And you weren't calling me a socialist were you? 8^)

>   If you want to have a computer
> digital contest, make that a separate event, not mingled with the  
> SSB and
> CW.  Keep the PA QSO Party simple and focused.

	As I learned a long time ago, the PAQSO is not simple. And it wasn't  
simple a long, long, time before I was involved with it. 1.5 point  
QSO's anyone?


> The ARRL has done the same
> confusion and diluting with Field Day.  Too many categories!

	I think there might be a fundamental issue with operator perceptions  
here Bill. Field Day is emphatically NOT a contest.

	In any event, I have said it in other places. The PAQSO party is not  
for everyone. There are people who are exceptionally competitive by  
nature, and the party may very well be "Not Good Enough" for them.

	Thanks for your input, Bill.

-73 de Mike KB3EIA -