[Cwo] Mult rule change - and announce

Thu May 5 20:30:33 PDT 2011

Super!  The contesting.com blurb is great.  If you don't mind, I'll send a
copy to N0AX.
Since that has a link to the cwopen web page, we need to get that going
quickly. Folks will be looking at it and trying to find the rules.

Alan

On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Rob <k6rb at baymoon.com> wrote:

>  I have identified about 80 contest clubs, worldwide, that posted decent
> numbers of logs in CQ WW CW. I'm planning to create a spreadsheet with club
> names and email addresses, then using VerticalResponse, hit them all with an
> email blast next week requesting that they post or otherwise let their
> members know about the contest. We can do a follow up, later, as you
> suggested.
>
> I am now working on a similar list of online and print media that cover ham
> radio and ham radio contesting. I will be doing the same thing with those
> media (e.g. an email blast with a news release).
>
> I already posted something, today, on contesting.com . Here's the URL:
> http://www.contesting.com/articles/1141
>  It will be posted on the Website in a day or so. I plan to contact Bruce
> Horn, next week, and give him the details he needs to include us on his
> calendar for August, and I'll also be working the other online media in
> similar fashion.
>
> I think the real bounce is going to come from the bottoms up approach
> directly to the contest clubs. If we can get YCCC, PVRC, SMC and the like
> "turned on," we'll have a lot of players in the game.
>
> Rob K6RB
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Alan Maenchen <ad6e at arrl.net>
> *To:* cwo at kkn.net
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 05, 2011 5:31 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Cwo] Mult rule change - and announce
>
> I just don't want to get caught in a chicken-egg thing.  Yes, someone at
> N1MM promised to do something, but they didn't say what or when. I get a bit
> nervous with such lack of commitment. My "project manager" ears perk up. I
> hate to just beat on folks directly.  Indirect force is often more
> effective. I'm thinking of mass hammering from users... but how to get them
> to do that?  Once N1MM is committed, then we can mention them and that
> becomes the hammer. But that isn't there yet.
>
> BTW, I noticed DL1EFD has written several Writelog contest modules. I sent
> him a note a few days ago asking if he could do one for CWO, but got no
> reply.
>
> Rob,  do you have a list of magazines and such (newsletters) to go out to
> initially?  I've already covered JA with 59DX, but should hit them again.
> Roland gave his ideas for EU.  I used to have a file with many
> magazines/newsletters for CQP but now it's hopelessly out of date.  Still,
> if I can find it at home it may be a good starting point. Let's come up with
> a list now.
>
> My thoughts about publicity:
> 1)  hit all the magazines, newsletters, and web calendars that we can
> find.  Now. Assume a 2 month publishing delay.
> 2)  Build up our CWO web site so it looks ready even if it may not be done
> behind the scenes. By June?
> 3)  Go out with individual spam (I hate to go that far, but it works .. and
> it isn't like we're trying to sell soap)... Aug 1 and again Aug 15?
>
> other ideas?
>
> Alan
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:58 PM, <k6rb at baymoon.com> wrote:
>
>> This is very good, Alan. As for publicity and mentioning logging programs,
>> I can't recall any other contest making a big deal about which logging
>> programs support it. We should just keep hammering away at N1MM. If that
>> single entity supports us, we're home, because anyone can download it for
>> free, as opposed to WriteLog, which costs money. And, frankly, I could
>> care less about WIN-TEST. If we get a big EU turnout, the WIN-TEST folks
>> will have had to download N1MM, and will probably give WIN-TEST an earful,
>> later. So, the heck with 'em.
>>
>> Ideally, I'd like to see N1MM and WriteLog support us. As you know, I sent
>> emails to both. Pete mentioned something about an "N3" or "K3" who said
>> it's a done deal with N1MM. Do you know about that?
>>
>> I thought I might try to write a module for WriteLog but it involves
>> knowing a decent amount about C++ programming, and I know zilch about C++.
>> We could put something out on the CWops reflector asking if any of the
>> members might be able to help out, but let's hold off until after the DC
>> dinner (this weekend).
>>
>> I was thinking that maybe N5RR, who wrote CWops Award Manager (CAM)
>> software, might be able to help us?
>>
>> Meanwhile, I think we can publicize this event without having any logging
>> programs mentioned. Let the people who are interested inquire of N1MM,
>> WriteLog, and others about whether they intend to support it. When we know
>> for sure that one or more are doing so, we'll announced it. I don't want
>> to announce the minor-league players because it will detract from the
>> credibility of the event, right now.
>>
>> Rob K6RB
>>
>> > Attached is rules rev 8.
>> >
>> > I got a very confused reply from an old friend, DK3GI about what is a
>> > mult.
>> > The term "unique" is evidently very solidly defined in contesting as
>> being
>> > a
>> > call that appears ONCE on ONE log during the contest.  We thought this
>> > might
>> > be a problem earlier, but I didn't think it would be serious. It is
>> > serious,
>> > especially for a non-English speaker.  So, I've changed the wording and
>> > eliminated the word "unique".
>> >
>> >
>> > On another front; publicity.  I've been waiting until we get rules on
>> the
>> > web site and resolving issues like this mult rule before going out to
>> > publications. I think we're at that point now although the web site is
>> > still
>> > not ready yet.  The big hole I see is the lack of software support.
>> We've
>> > gotten "we'll put it on our list of things to do" by both N1MM and
>> > Writelog.
>> > Win Test gave no indication of even receiving our request, and N6TV
>> > doesn't
>> > think we will. N3FJP said NO (he seems to be dropping support for
>> anything
>> > now). However, GenLog and SD both seem enthusiastic and said they will
>> > support us.
>> >
>> > The question is what to say about logging support in our announcement. I
>> > don't want to delay, but I do want to indicate that CWO will be
>> supported
>> > by
>> > "most" loggers and actually list the loggers we know are on board. The
>> > problem is that GenLog and SD are bit players. I suppose we could point
>> to
>> > those two and thus embarrass the others for lack of support? Might be
>> > self-defeating.   Suggestions?  Word-smithing is everything.  ;-)
>> >
>> > Rob has a short announcement that looks good, but makes no mention of
>> > this.
>> > I seem to have misplaced it.
>> >
>> > Tks & 73,  Alan  AD6E
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Cwo mailing list
>> > Cwo at kkn.net
>> > http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwo mailing list
> Cwo at kkn.net
> http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.kkn.net/pipermail/cwo/attachments/20110505/2165a073/attachment.html 