[MiQP-Mail] Rover category

[Hank Greeb]

Looks like I got to the chair of the committee, who ruled negatively on 
the subject.

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.

We have a few hardy folks to set up as portables. It is hard for one 
reading the MiQP reports page to figure how many portable operations 
existed in 2007, and how many of these come from out of state.  It 
wasn't very hard to determine that we had reports from any sort of fixed 
stations (either permanent stations or portable) in only 48 of the 83 
counties..

Yes, MiQP is a fun contest.  I, for one, am always looking for ways to 
make it better, to encourage more fixed stations in the 83 counties.  I 
believe our goal should be to have a fixed station in each of the 83 
counties.  We are far, far away from this goal - if we even have this goal.

73 de n8xx Hg

David Pruett wrote:
> Tim,
>
> Thank you for that clear explanation about rovers.  I could not have 
> said it better myself.
>
> Hank, the MiQP committee has discussed a rover category previously at 
> the urging of K8MR.  We did not elect to create such a category for 
> the very reasons Tim describes; i.e., the lack of significant 
> popularity in the OhQP.  And as Tim describes, the present rules allow 
> for fixed station operation in multiple counties (however it does not 
> provide for combining into a single points total).
>
> Which does not mean that the topic will never be revisited.  It's not 
> a bad idea, and more fixed station operation in rare counties would be 
> a good thing.  However, interest in a rover category must be 
> demonstrated first, not just talked about. I'm not aware of anyone 
> chomping at the bit to go do it.
>
> Creating a new category generally means additional awards (plaques or 
> certificates) with additional expense.  While the current MiQP awards 
> program is at, or very close to, break-even the current economic 
> climate makes it hard to raise sponsorship for additional awards.  
> Even the new "Top Michigan EOC Station" plaque was re-purposed with 
> the same sponsor for 2008.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave Pruett, K8CC
> MiQP Chairman
>
>
> K9TM wrote:
>> There is nothing to stop someone from operating from multiple 
>> counties  (or states) today.  This is covered by rule 8e and 8f.  No 
>> rule change  is required.
>>
>> Simply creating a new category won't generate more activity.
>>
>> Here's an example from the OhQP who added a rover category in 2004.   
>> In 2004 there was 1 rover, in 2005 there were 4 rovers, in 2006 1  
>> rover and 2007 2 rovers.  One of the entrants in the rover category  
>> each year was the same station.  He wasn't a new addition to the QSO  
>> Party as he operated in other categories in prior years.  The other  
>> rovers weren't new participants either as they were people who  
>> normally participated in other categories.
>>
>> Your request is something that should be taken to the MiQP 
>> committee.   Once they rule on the topic, you should respect their 
>> decision.
>>
>> 73 Tim K9TM