| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 "Mike" == Mike Coslo writes: Mike With the likely demise of Morse code testing, is there any Mike reason to have contests give double the points for Morse code Mike contacts? Jack How is the presence or absence of Morse code testing related to Jack the point multiplier for Morse code contacts? They're Jack orthogonal, as far as I can tell. Mike I was always told that the increased points offered was an Mike encouragement to work CW. That doesn't really answer the question. A Technician can send CW on certain HF bands, even without a higher-class license-holder present. A ham with any other license can work phone contacts. Therefore, whether or not an amateur has passed a Morse code test has nothing to do with woether or not they can use Morse code. Even if the multiplier is to provide encouragement to use Morse code, it still doesn't have anything to do with whether or not hams are tested. Now, if you're going to assert that the potential end to Morse code testing will eventually cause hams to stop learning and/or using Morse code, and that therefore the multiplier is akin to the "marriage penalty" [1], well, I'm not sure that's true. If it is, NCI should be raising holy hell about the pro-code conspiracy behind all these contests, right? [...] Mike I've seen a number of cases where a phone operator has worked Mike hard and logged a lot of QSO's, only to be beaten by a CW op Mike with little more than half that number. Jack And how hard did that CW op work? Mike I doubt twice as hard as the Phone person. You could measure it yourself, you know. Work two similar contests (say, two of the QSO parties coming up soon). Operate solely in phone for the first contest. Score your points and keep track of your experience with notes or something. Operate solely in CW for the second contest. Do the same sort of scoring and note-taking. Report back to the group with your personal experience. When I know the code, I'll do the same thing, if only to satisfy my own curiosity. Mike - Mike KB3EIA - Jack. [1] For those who are unfamiliar with this concept, for some time the tax structure in the US was such that married couples with two similar incomes paid more tax than married couples with one income, or with two very dissimilar incomes, even when the total number of dollars earned is the same. The common theory behind this is that it is designed to encourage married couples to have one working spouse and one non-working spouse. Whether or not this is moral, ethical, or even a good idea is a different question. - -- Jack Twilley jmt at twilley dot org http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAju4UGPFSfAB/ezgRAvc8AKDsuo+Lf/ts2eXFq6wc6f9fJET1dwCg7/4Q W7TwjbDIGGxQdW3cYMrHczE= =cyRV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| FCC Assigns RM Numbers To Three New Restructuring Petitions | Policy | |||
| Rev.Jim the troller (was Bootlegging in 1948?) | Policy | |||
| With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? | Policy | |||
| Ham Radio In The Post-Code Testing Era | Policy | |||
| With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? | General | |||