Geoffrey,
"At what point are the rules incapable of addressing the current issues?"
Excellent point. In general, humans don't like changes. We like stability.
In our passion not to change anything since the beginning of time (and
contesting), our contest rules continue to be made more and more obsolete by
lots of things, attitude changes and technology, to name two. Rules banning
this and that technology are pretty much useless as they become more and
more unenforceable. (Think outside the box and down the road a few years.)
It's easy for our log analysis to show there is a 98% chance that you are
cheating, but it's another matter to prove it.
A major regulatory vacuum is developing in contesting (DXing is another,
similar topic). [The] one thing Stu Green and I agreed upon was that for the
DXCC rules to be completely fair and effective, a team of lawyers would be
required in their writing. One issue then is how far should contest sponsors
go in that direction, and where should common sense take over. Maybe
establishing that line is in part the function of forums like CQ-Contest. At
the very least the forums could serve to define the problem.
73, Wayne, N7NG
Jackson Hole, WY
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|