On 23/08/2020 01:05, David Gilbert wrote:
Given a choice I generally prefer unassisted operation myself,
That's my point - the "SAC folks" have unilaterally removed that choice
- and dressed it up as "allowing for assistance in all categories". A
fine example of doublespeak.
but that seems like a lot of umbrage
Umbrage? Hardly - it's a complaint on principle, and on behalf of the
clear majority of single-op entrants in the 2019 CW SAC contest who
chose to operate Unassisted, who were not consulted about the change,
and who will be denied the choice in 2020.
Scandinavia: Unassisted 130, Assisted 56 - 70% unassisted.
Non-Scandinavia: Unassisted 527, Assisted 340 - 61% unassisted.
toward the folks doing all the work
That's my point. They may have been doing all the work, but they're
proposing not to do it in future. The work includes a rigorous check of
the logs of the leading Unassisted entrants - to verify their status.
It seems the SAC folks (the Contest Committee) are no longer prepared to
do this, and are thereby reneging on their responsibilities.
... The SAC folks don't owe you (or me) anything.
Really? Then let's turn it around a little. If the CQ WW or the ARRL
DX Contest Committees unilaterally "allowed for assistance in all
classes", would anyone still say they don't owe you (or me) anything?
They simply wouldn't get away with it - and neither should the SAC
Contest Committee.
73,
Paul EI5DI
Dave AB7E
On 8/21/2020 3:43 PM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
On 21/08/2020 21:06, SM5AJV wrote:
UPDATE
After publishing the rules for SAC 2020 we have got some reactions on
allowing for assistance in all operator categories.
"Allowing for assistance in all operator categories" may be true, but
it is not the whole truth. What you (the SAC Committee) have done is
abolish the SO Unassisted category. This benefits no one but you -
the contest sponsors.
The reason behind the
change is that we want to reduce the number of operator categories and
plaques.
That is nonsense. I see no evidence of a shortage of plaque donors
for SO Unassisted. Again, reducing the number of operator categories
benefits no one but you - the contest sponsors.
The reduction will also make the log handling and checking easier
for the log checker.
That's true - but it also represents an abdication of responsibility
for verifying that the leading unassisted entries actually were
unassisted, for which there are long-standing and well-established
techniques. Did anyone on the Committee contact the sponsors of the
major contests (CQ, ARRL, IARU) to see how they do it? I suspect not.
In order to recognize operators that prefer not using any assistance we
have decided that you are able to state if you operated without any
assistance when submitting the log. Operators who participate without
assistance will be marked with (N) after the call in the ranking lists.
That looks like a cop-out to me. I invite the SAC Contest Committee
to address its responsibilities and reinstate SO Unassisted now -
before the contests next month.
73,
Paul EI5DI
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|