On Dec 17, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Coslo" <mjc5@psu.edu>
>
> Snip ..
>
>> You are setting up a two tier system of "serious" and "not serious"
>> competitor.
>
> We have a two-tier system already. If you're serious, you
> send in a Cabrillo log - an electronic text record of your
> QSOs. If you're not serious, you send in something else or
> perhaps don't send in a log.
That isn't tiering, that's a conscious decision to compete or not.
>
> No one complains now about Cabrillo logs, but there were
> plenty of complaints seven years ago. If contest organisers
> specify recordings - electronic audio records of your QSOs,
> as a condition of entry, they will soon be no more of a
> burden than a Cabrillo log, and they will not cost a penny
> extra.
Your justification could be used for everything from equipment
impounding to requiring blood tests for participants.
After all if the contester doesn't have anything to hide, he or she
should be happy to comply with any mandate. No thanks.
>
>> Your vision of future contesting is quite chilling, Jim. Is a guilty
>> until proven innocent system,
>
> It will be the same as contesting today, and it will
> still be fun. Audio files would be just another log
> verification option.
>
Respectfully, I disagree. There comes a time, a line somewhere, where
a contestant moves from documentation to proving that they are not
cheating.
Respectfully submit that proving I am not cheating is not fun, and I
suspect that a lot of other people feel that way.
And sorry Paul, I still find your future for contesting chilling.
-73 de Mike N3LI -
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|