CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL REPLY - Remote Site & Contesting Rules

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL REPLY - Remote Site & Contesting Rules
From: Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 11:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
----- Original Message ----

> There is no public place to which official opinions are posted
> and from which all would benefit equally.

If you really want to get into it, as an employee of a national organization 
every electronic correspondence of his must be archived and available for legal 
proceedings for many, many years.  So if you don't believe that he was properly 
represented to the list, just go sue them to find out.  
----------------------------
Rhetorically, it is not my repsonsibility to chase hearsay "evidence".

I simply suggested that if there were a public place where adjudicators would 
place their rules interpretations then ALL participants would benefit.  You 
snipped out the part of my note that said that anything less than that would 
effectively unlevel the field of competition (by restricting rules-knowledge 
and their clear understanding to the select few who asked privately).

Said another way, "if it can be said to one person, it can be said to all 
people"...yet, it is not.

Regards,
Ev, W2EV


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>