[Cwo] FW: 2014 Summary Before Voting REVISED!

[Jim Talens]

Oops, I added a sentence to the wrong paragraph.   So point 3 should not
have included the comment about JA conditions.  That should have been in
para. 4.   So here we are again:

 

From: cwo-bounces at kkn.net [mailto:cwo-bounces at kkn.net] On Behalf Of Jim
Talens
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 8:18 AM
To: cwo at kkn.net
Subject: Re: [Cwo] 2014 Summary Before Voting

 

My view in response to Dean's summary:  

 

1.        I do not view as sacrosanct the "first partial weekend of August"
as precluding August 23.  This is not a Club Bylaw, after all.  So August 23
can remain a candidate weekend.

 

2.        Excellent summary, Dean, that based on stark facts correctly
distills the choices as being between August 23 and Sept 6.   SAC on Sept 20
is too direct and massive a conflict; Sept 13 is FOC; Aug 30 is YO DX, Sept
27 is major RTTY.

3.        There has been considerable discussion about the indirect conflict
with NA QP on September 6.   Hank and I feel that this is just too much of a
distraction given they butt up against each other in part.  There is
sizeable participation in NA QP and it seems doubtful most CW operators can
easily accommodate both efforts in one weekend.  It's one or the other, with
maybe some attention to the two non-adjoining CWO sessions by NA QP
participants.   Overall, I rate this is a major distraction because it would
likely reduce CWO participation significantly overall, not just for one
session.  Still, the NA QP is not Sweepstakes, after all.   So it's not an
event killer.  Moreover, I do not think that at the end of the day it's
smart to shift hours to allow a breathing space between that one CWO session
and NA QP.  It would remove the symmetry of our 3-sessions and does not
remove the negative impact of adjoining events

 

4.        August 23 is problematic in that it conflicts with three minor
state contests and one JA Ham Fair.   The participation levels of the three
state QSO parties (KS, OH, HI) strike me as a lesser distraction than we
face on Sept 6.  As to the JA Ham Fair, Rob has done a great job in
garnering interest in CWops in Japan.  To what extent would CWO during the
JA Ham Fair result in a conflict that either undermines what Rob has done or
would simply preclude JA participation?  My guess is that this has a far
lesser impact than the consequences of holding CWO on Sept 6, even combining
the impacts of two state QSO parties with the JA Ham Fair.  Moreover, it
would hopefully be only for 2014.  Besides, the goodwill that Rob has
developed with JA guys remains in terms of membership welcoming,
participating in CWT events, and even CWO to the extent that some or many JA
guys still have some access to CWO.  If we explain to them about our
Hobson's choice of dates and apologize, I suspect we will escape any
noticeable negative lasting impact.   We might even issue a special article
of some kind in July 2014 in Solid Copy featuring JA membership and noting
in that the unfortunate circumstances that forced us to choose August 23 for
CWO in 2014.   Also, if conditions are not really good, and given the
overall sunspot cycle situation they are not likely to be good, the overall
JA level of participation would at best be very limited and mostly to W6/7.

 

 

I await a response from those who know about FOC scheduling to see about CWO
for year 2015 and whether FOC has already reserved the Sept 13 (plus or
minus) for that year.  If not, we should jump on that to make it a perpetual
CWO date.  Or not!

 

My vote:  I wish I could weight my vote!  I would say 51% for August 23 and
49% for Sept. 6.  

 

Jim, N3JT

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.kkn.net/pipermail/cwo/attachments/20130917/c0a5793e/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: Untitled attachment 01019.txt
Url: http://www.kkn.net/pipermail/cwo/attachments/20130917/c0a5793e/attachment.txt