| 
In this case the patient is the one penalized...........:(
How can I know what you copied unless you are saying that all exchanges 
must be sent back and confirmed.  If so you might have a tough time 
selling it.  People like to contest for the speed runs.  SS is loosing 
traction because of the very long, read boring exchange unless you are SO2R. 
Generally it is the receiver that blows the exchange.  I have yet to 
hear N1MM+ screw up sending my memory info. 
On 11/10/2016 4:48 PM, Igor Sokolov wrote:
 
Ward,
Very interesting. But this approach begs  the question: If 
prescription finally got wrong (name of the medicine or dosage) who's 
fault is it? Transmitter or receiver? Should not both sides be penalized? 
73, Igor UA9CDC
----- Исходное сообщение ----- От: "Ward Silver" <hwardsil@gmail.com>
Кому: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Отправлено: 10 ноября 2016 г. 21:18
Тема: Re: [CQ-Contest] When it's over, it's over (again)
 > If it wasn't a penmanship contest then, why is it a typing contest 
now?
At the risk of setting off a "plastic owl pointing true north by 
remote control" thread... 
Why is it that we have contests at all?  It is to practice our 
ability to communicate and to reward effectiveness - in whatever form 
that takes. Part of it is knowing when the bands are open and 
closed.  Part of it is assembling a station that works well.  Part of 
it is having good operating technique.  And part of it is accurately 
transcribing the exchanged information into whatever format is required. 
We are fond of claiming that contesting makes us good public service 
operators and all that back-patting we do for ourselves.  Imagine we 
are relaying orders for prescription medicines needed in a disaster 
area.  Is a typo in "hydrochlorothiazide" acceptable because we were 
in a hurry? ("Can you give me that phonetically before the band 
closes?") Is mistakenly changing a dosage of 50 mg to 500 mg OK 
because we hit 0 twice? ("Whoa - how did that huge hairy bat get in 
here?")  Of course not...we would recognize that as an error and we 
should do so when N0AX gets changed to N0XA.  Each unforced error 
needs to produce negative feedback so we will work to lower our error 
rate.  The CQ WW introduction of penalties for errors was exactly the 
right remedy for sloppy operating because it provides both carrot and 
stick to operate at a rate no faster than what optimizes effective 
operating.  Nothing is error-free but a three-QSO penalty has a way 
of focusing the mind. 
At any rate (so to speak), anything noted during the period of 
competition is fair game for log correction.  I would prefer in the 
long term that QSOs are submitted in real-time and verified shortly 
thereafter so that this whole notion of "log" goes away along with 
all the misbehavior and delays it engenders, but in the mean time, 
transcription into the submitted record of competition is as much a 
part of the contest as transmitting the information in the first place. 
73, Ward N0AX
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest 
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
 
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
 |