I don't say this because I disagree with the current practice of only
counting the first 24 hours for those who go over, though I recognize others
have an issue with it.
I just wish, because it would make these discussions moot and really, really
simplify stuff for everyone, that rules would say what they mean.
The rule says "thou shalt not operate more than 24 hours." The rule doesn't
say "you can operate as long as you want but we'll only count the first 24."
Similarly, the rule defining a QSO states categorically that BOTH parties
have to get it right for the QSO to count*. (At least in the ARRL rules.)
Yet the log-checkers will give credit for a Q even if one log entry is wrong
(though close enough to indicate an attempted Q did take place: such as if I
log N6HC at the same time that NB5C has me correctly in his log (NB5C gets
the Q, I don't.))
Similarly, some will argue that you should leave every Q in your log, even
ones where you know the other guy didn't get you right.
If sponsors would either stick to the written rules or, when they see the
need for a change, change the written rules rather than just manufacture a
new interpretation of them, it would really help the rest of us understand
what to do. And it will help level the playing field, at least as far as
interpreting the rules is concerned.
These are two examples where the reality and theory of rules diverge. Anyone
think of any others?
73, kelly
ve4xt
* General Rules for HF Contests,
3.2.All callsigns and exchange information must be sent, received,
acknowledged and logged correctly by each station for a complete QSO.
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|