I"m not sure what a hall of shame online would accomplish, but I guess if
you want to go zero tolerance with rules violations this would be the way
to go.
My only stipulation is that the rules violation has to be deliberate, and
not accidental.
73, Ria, N2RJ
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr@comcast.net> wrote:
> Bravo, Mike. Let me extend the thought a bit further. The CQWW Committee
> needs to be transparent and specific about its criteria for various
> actions. What warrants a warning, versus what warrants a DQ? What repeated
> infractions from one year to the next warrant a DQ?
>
> The old yellow card/red card system was an attempt at this. Nobody is
> asking *how* they caught the cheaters, just what the penalties are for
> various offenses, either current or repeated. That's the only way they will
> get pastthe perception that they are being arbitrary, favoring a particular
> nationality and so on.
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
> at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now
> spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
> For spots, please use your favorite
> "retail" DX cluster.
>
>
> On 4/13/2017 7:25 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
>
>> CQ chose only to publish stations that were Disqualified.
>>
>> How about a list of all stations that were found to have broken a rule(s)
>> and the penalty for doing so.
>>
>> How about a lot more transparency.
>>
>> Just a thought.
>>
>> W0MU
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|