The Contest Community has voted. Almost 500 contesters particpated in the survey on ARRL’s recent decisions. As promised, I’m providing the results one day after the survey’s end for further discussion. Some of the answers are very clear, other’s should be refined. However here are the results without any interpretation or censorship. Take them, build your opinion and share your thoughts with us!
In total 476 Contesters particpated in the survey. The graphic above shows the geographical distribution from where the participants came from.
Q1: Shall Headquarter stations be excluded from the IARU HF Championship results?
|Yes, there should be no more HQ competition||73||15,4%|
|No, HQ stations are a substantial part of this contest
and have deserved their own competition
|No opinion / Not sure||23||4,9%|
Q2: Is it ok to introduce four weeks prior to the contest major changes in the rules of IARU HF Championship ?
|Yes, the contest sponsor / conduction organization
have this right; it’s their contest
|No, (major) rules must not be changed on such a short notice||354||75,2%|
|No opinion / Not sure||13||2,8%|
Q3: Do you consider it as necessary to re-evaluate the rules of the IARU HF Championship for the upcoming years (2011+) ?
|Yes, especially the 1-3-5 punctuation rule||86||18,2%|
|Yes, especially the HQ category||209||44,5%|
|No, I like the contest in the way it has been (rules prior to 2010)||123||26,1%|
|I’m not sure / I have no opinion||31||6,6%|
the “other” inputs:
- HQ stations should get zero points for contacts within their country (4x)
- 1-3-5 AND HQ Categorgy need a revision (3x)
- EA8 may not count as EA
- HQ-station location should get the same points as their HQ-office is adressed
- Checking of Valid QSOs must become better
Q4: Would you consider the introduction of an IARU arbitration panel as useful?
|Yes, we need an additional instance with the empowerment
to take decisions and act as a referee
|No, the Contest conducting organization (currently ARRL) is sufficient.
The is no need for another administrative institution
|No opinion / Not sure||39||8,4%|
Q5: Are you satisfied how ARRL has conducted the IARU HF Championship in the past? (until 2009)?
Q6: Are you satisfied with the recent decisions of ARRL in regard to IARU HF Championship 2009 and 2010?
Q7: Who would be your prefered organisation to conduct the IARU HF Championship?
the “other” inputs:
- An international, independent Board / Committee (44x)
- IARU itself (40x)
- RSGB (UK) (8x)
- Alternating conductors with common regularities (e.g. like Soccer World Championship) (7x)
- Anyone who agrees to conduct / do the work (5x)
- REF (France) (3x)
- none of the mentioned organisations (3x)
- USKA (Swiss) (2x)
- OEVSV (Austria) (2x)
- Anyone but ARRL (2x)
- neutral member (2x)
- A non HQ competitor the year of the contest (1x)
- ARI (Italy) (1x)
- all except DARC and ARRL and ARI (also ARI is not adeguate at the role) (1x)
- BARC (Boring Amateur Radio Club) (1x)
- European multinational team accepted by IARU R1 (1x)
- if the rules are fair and clear, it does not matter (1x)
- last years champion (1x)
- Independent, not with IARU affiliated organisation (1x)
- SSA (Sweden (1x)
- Someone who hates Cabrillo as much as me (1x)
- This question makes no sense , organizers should have rights to submit rule change. Participants to request one. (1x)
- United Nations (1x)
Q8: Do you agree that your log will be made public with the submission to the contest sponsor / conducting entity?
|Yes, all logs must be made public||396||84,6%|
|No, a log is a personal item and privacy should be respected||45||9,6%|
|No opinion / Not sure||27||5,8%|
Q9: Does ARRL’s decision effect your participation in the upcoming IARU HF Championship 2010?
|Yes, I will reconsider my participation||206||43,9%|
|No, I will participate for sure!||191||40,9%|
|No opinion / Not sure||70||15,1%|