K3BU writes:
> I think it is time to adapt and bring some sanity into this "penalty"
> stuff.
So - I suppose that makes the people who support this concept (of which
there seem to a majority) are insane?
I think any rational person can see that this battle has been fought over
and over and the status quo isn't going to change because of a few people
who are fired up about it.
One of the *really neat* things about the penalty (once you stop trying to
fight it) is that it really gives a big incentive to work on your logging
accuracy. The payoffs are huge. Almost all of the big time contesters I
know emphasize accuracy and use it as a competitive weapon.
If your accuracy isn't as good as it can be - there are very simple things
you can do to improve your score. Take a few extra seconds to make sure the
callsign is right - or that the guy is really working you. If there is no
penalty, the incentive isn't as large.
And besides - it really wouldn't have been cool if K6CIW had raised his
hand and said: "I just haved a hunch of noney in my bar insurance".
Sorry about those NILs. They do happen and sometimes through no fault of
your own. Most of the contesters I know realize that this is just part of
the price of doing business - and being sure that the process will find
people who are being sloppy about verifying the QSO - and penalizing them
to the point of not being competitive.
Tree N6TR
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|