[MiQP-Mail] Rover category

[Morse, Earl (E.A.)]

Hank, 

Definitely talking two issues here. 

Rover category and  how close to the county line do you have to be to be
in the county.

The Rover category may be a viable category especially if you could show
that it would increase activity.  I know I worked N9NE in almost every
county he parked in last weekend.  Partly because he was in the UP where
we had good propagation and partly because he spent more than 30 minutes
in each county.  If you could show a half dozen rover operations that
would be good for a couple hundred or so QSOs from each of 4 counties
then  it would make a good case for the category.  Basically, activity
begets more activity but adding categories just waters down the activity
you already have.  I would look at the EOC category.  Almost every
county has a Red Cross station or EOC station or both, however I don't
think that the EOC category generated as much activity amongst the
non-contest community as we were hoping.  Maybe the logs submitted will
prove me wrong.

I have a problem with multiple counties though.  You can't operate from
two places simultaneously.  It isn't allowed by any awards programs i.e.
DXCC, WAS and County Hunters.  Close only counts in horsehoes, hand
grenades, and nuclear weapons but not in ham radio QTH entities.  I have
worked the Illinois QSO party and found it silly to work one QSO for 4
multipliers.  At least that's what they were implying.  I would reply
with QSL, YOU ARE  59 MI 59 MI 59 MI 59 MI and log the 4 QSOs.  Their
game, their rules.  Basically, it seemed that these stations just wanted
to be a little more special than your run of the mill IL stations in
hopes it would generate the pileups they needed to stroke their egos.
>From what I heard from some of those stations, they needed a lot more
practice on those pile ups too.  

Anyway, it's the Michigan QSO party and you just can't be any more
special than being in Michigan, whichever county/counties you are in.
Pick a category and make your plans to operate it as best you can.

N8SS







>I won't push for the rover category, because the circular reasoning
that 
>we don't have many of these may be a result of the fact that we don't 
>have the category.  But, we'll never know until we'd allow the category

>and push it.  I have no idea of whether this would turn out to be 
>popular or not.  I've scouted the four county corner point of Clare, 
>Isabella, Mecosta, and Isabella, which is a very isolated area, and 
>would be amenable to a fixed operation within 600' of that corner.  
>Similarly, Kent, Montcalm, and Newago, and Ionia are three county areas

>with possibilities.
>
>Maybe we need a portable category?  The Illinois QSO party had over 20 
>portable stations in 2007 in single, two, three and four county 
>operation.  Some 16 operators were cited as coming from out of state to

>operate either as mobiles or portables.  Their portable category allows

>a station to set up in a single county, or at a 2, 3 or four county 
>intersection.   The number of individual counties activated by these 
>portable stations was 39 in 2007.  Most of these stations operated for 
>the full 8 hours of their contest.  Many of the counties covered would 
>not otherwise be covered by fixed stations.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.miqp.org/pipermail/miqp-mail_miqp.org/attachments/20080425/ed1c2958/attachment.html