[PaQSO] QRP Multiplier

[emiske at comcast.net]

Bill, I just don't understand.

I presume you're talking about the CQ WW this weekend. There IS NO QRP mult in that contest. If there were a QRP mult, would it make your QRP signal be any easier to pull out? And if there were a QRP mult in that contest, it could be 2 or 22 or 222 and it would make no difference. QRP is competing against QRP, not against QRO. What end could it possibly serve? 

If you need to somehow someway "adjust" your score so as to compare it to K3LR's 17 million just for your own satisfaction, use what ever you want/need. But you are not competing against K3LR, so why bother. 

I'm sorry, I guess I'm just "thick" on this.

Ed/WA3SES


-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: Bill Gallagher <wa3ra at yahoo.com> 

> I actually think the QRP multiplier is accepatbel. Over the course of this 
> weekend, I heard 'sorry OM just can'tt pull you out' for 80% of the 'test. That 
> doesn;'t happen so much at 100 watts. I think that a 2x mult for a 15 to 17 dB 
> deficit is a fair trade. 
> 
> Of course, I DO have a dog in this hunt... 
> 
> 
> Bill G. WA3RA 
> 
> ----- Original Message ---- 
> From: "emiske at comcast.net" 
> To: Pa QSO Party Reflector 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 1:46:25 PM 
> Subject: [PaQSO] QRP Multiplier 
> 
> Before the discussion mutates too far (and I have no problem with the 
> mutation(s) that have already and/or might come along), I just want to state 
> again what I'm suggesting, and why: 
> 
> I suggest the elimination of the QRP multiplier because: 
> 
> I THINK that, because there are already QRP, >5w/<151W and QRO categories for 
> the EPA and WPA awards, it is 
> 
> __________________________________________________ 
> Do You Yahoo!? 
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com