New rules, bad news?

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • Author
  • #2710

    I believe that the modification of 2 of the rules of WWFF will not favor its popularity

    1. Disappears the minimum activity time of 2 hours. I think that the only thing that is going to favor is the great stations that based on power manage to sneak into the log. It also opens the way for the emergence of express activities.
    2. Disappear the separation of 2 hours between 2 WWFF activities. I think it will favor the disinformation of the reference that is taken to the air.

    That is just my opinion

    • This topic was modified 7 years, 1 month ago by Andrew M0YMA.

    At last it’s the activator who decides how many QSO’s he wants in the log and how long and with how much power he activates …

    For me personal an activation is not satisfying with only 100 QSO in the log, I want more … Some are happy with only a handfull …

    I have no patience for QRP, some have big fun with QRP … etc etc

    73 44


    Activations durning a time of no propagation ,-the problem is to perform 100 qso.
    Requirement and 200 from the club she works one operator is ridiculous.


    Hi, Danny.
    I share your opinion about making the maximum number of QSO, in our activities, we do about 400 QSO, but because we think that the spirit of the WWFF (EAFF in my case) diploma is to give everyone the maximum opportunity to work on that reference And consequently give all the maximum opportunities to have a contact / reference more to obtain diplomas.
    But your way of operating and mine are not the only ones, and the rules (in my point of view) are to guarantee a minimum, if the minimum is 44 QSO and there is no minimum of time, because I guarantee that there will be some Only 44 QSO.
    I see that every day the WWFF diploma tends to resemble the SOTA diploma, I think it’s a serious mistake.
    How would you feel that on December 1, 2016 I would do an EAFF activity whose reference had never been activated and only made the first 44 and more powerful hunters? I think you would not like it very much.
    Standards should avoid bad habits, not encourage them.
    With respect to the radioclubs I totally agree with SP9YFF, the QSO minimum should be set at 44 by the number of operators that have intervened.

    73 + 44

    • This reply was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by EA3HKY.
    Luk ON4BB

    In principal there is not to many new rules in.The rules V4.0 needed an adaption to the actual situation with reflection to our logsearch.
    There is a big difference between WWFF operation in the south of EU and the North SM/LA /OH and a still more pronounced difference if we look to our WWFF activity in the US and VK/JA. Those identities are growing and even reaching the level of 44 is pretty hard for those guys. We need to keep these guys on board and not to smatch them away from the WWFF program with qsos level they never can reach.The 44 level was implemented already maybe more than 2 years ago.
    Next we would give the activators more flexibility. The 44 level was discussed and accepted as a good compromise. We did not want to complicate our rules, because we still need to control everything in our logsearch.
    We want to keep it simple as possible. Each National program has his own National identity to enfold them is a big issue.
    Again we have to look beyond these National identities and find an common denominator. And I know nothing is perfect.
    It is the role of all our National programs to attract more activators and the best way to get more people involved, is to have activity on our bands. Activity is the best promotion for our program.
    Danny, is building up tools to promote, to attrach new activators. We need more time to implement our logsearch on our website.
    To all good next activity with lots of qsos & good hunting for our chasers.
    Luk ON4BB

    Pit YO3JW

    Hi all
    I have to comment follow:
    1. “Yearly you can add 200 new references”. If it be for all directory could be nice. But for each country is amazing. Just now we have a lot of references, mainly in small size countries.
    I thing that just now we have a lot in Directory. As I wrote in other place I proposed to frozen for a year any new one in directory.
    Let see what happens!
    2. Sorry to say, but in all this “Rules” no one word to thanks to all volunteer who made that WWFF is alive
    3. As without “activator” no chance to have WWFF, also without “hunters” no reason for to have “activators”
    So both are important for WWFF!
    Pit YO3JW


    HI All ๐Ÿ™‚
    You could add something about the election and duties of coordinators and log-managers, and the Committee, as they select, which period, what conditions should meet, or you can cancel, change, etc. .

    Luk ON4BB

    Some documents are in progress related to duties LM, NC and AW.

    Pit YO3JW

    May I have a question?
    What mean LM, NC and AW?
    Sorry, I am not so familiar with this abbreviations!
    “Some documents” or “Recommendations”
    Please don’t forget that each country have own rules!
    “Unity through diversity, collaboration through shared hobby!”

    Slawek sp4eoo

    Hi Pit and all,
    LM – Log Manager,
    NC – National Coordinator,
    AW – Award Manager (?),
    RM– Reference Manager,

    โ€œUnity through diversity, collaboration through shared hobby!โ€ – I agree.

    Andrew M0YMA

    Should anyone wish to take over as Website admin, and Logsearch Author they just have to email me… you don’t need to wait for an election ๐Ÿ™‚

    Logsearch is now re-written as a WordPress plugin – so PHP/MySQL and HTML/CSS/JavaScript


    Please don’t even think about leaving Andrew.

    I am going to speak now as just a fellow ham, not as a national coordinator.

    Some of you might want to be more appreciative to what these guys (managers/board/directors etc..) are able to accomplish with this program. Making all of these “moving parts” work correctly takes a ton of time and effort. We all do this for love of the sport and without compensation. Some of us have children, jobs etc, and still somehow get things done. I might nag at other members to get things accomplished, but I have found that everything seems to be moving in the correct direction.

    I am glad that the strange time restrictions and number of parks per day rules are being removed. It might make sense to Europeans because it’s easier to get a boatload of QSOs, but I am sorry, it doesn’t make sense for the US. I won’t put words into Paul’s mouth, but it didn’t seem to make sense for VK either.

    You have to look at what is good for all continents if you want this truly to stay an international program.

    Rob vk4aac

    Hi all, I agree with Jason. Many thanks to all the volunteers who work tirelessly to keep the WWFF program running.
    As for the new rules, each continent has it’s own set of problems. Here in Oz (Australia) it can be quite difficult at times to get 44 contacts in one afternoon. I personnally have had to go back to some parks several times to get 44+ contacts.
    I guess each country coordinator can set higher standards depending on the situation, but to encourage more activators and hunters the rules need to be set realistically to suit all countries and continents. This is a great hobby and a great program (WWFF) lets just enjoy it and hopefully encourage more hams to get involved.
    Rob VK4AAC


    I propose a new WWFF rule, all new FF (add past 1.1.2017) must have added the correct coordinates for adding to the map WWFF

    Thank you

    Alena – OK2APY

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • The topic ‘New rules, bad news?’ is closed to new replies.
Translate ยป