I'm thinking aloud over a pair of questions.
- Should the rules for the Multi-Operator Single Transmitter category be changed?
- Should the Single-Operator and Single-Operator Assisted categories be combined into one category?
Would I advocate capping number of transmitters in the Multi-Operator Single Transmitter category at one? I was taught to read intent and, at least for me, the intent of the category is (n = 1) transmitter however most station's operate transceiver. The term 'transmitter' is anachronistic rather one might label this category as Multi-Operator Single Transceiver.
What was the intent of this category at its inception? What will be the intent of this category 5, 10, or 15 years into the future? I believe, keeping pace with pertinent technology, is in the best interest of RadioSport and ham radio. In comparison, (n = 1) transceiver is (n = 1) transceiver, according to Survey Results #3 multi-two in addition to multi-plus outpaced the original intent of the category thus creating competitive imbalance.
I would see restoration of original intent and one that would benefit both ham radio and RadioSport in the long run. Potentially, an (n = 1) transceiver category may facilitate an interest in pooling material and financial resources in order to create RadioSport clubs on limited budgets.
It is time to re-think a 10-minute rule in addition to capping the number of times a transceiver may change bands. Just let them compete at full throttle.
Lastly, I would support combining Single-Operator and Single-Operator Assisted as long as the data supports a merger. Perhaps time has tested the two and it is time to combine.
Contest on!See Also.CQ WPX Contest Blog | Survey Results 2 and 3.P.S. Randy, K5ZD thank you for producing professional grade narrations and tables.