WOW, I actually agree with something Frank wrote for a change.
We don't need more screwing up of the existing rules with new ones that
break more things than they fix. The ARRL could easily put a stop to
Wayne's current group actions by DQing them for unsportsman like conduct,
if they wanted to enforce their unpublished INTENTS. What Wayne is doing
does not violate any rules, but does infringe on some people's impression
of the INTENT and or SPIRIT of the rules. It is apparent that what these
people think the intent/spirit of the rules are do not match with the ARRL
due to the lack of enforcement. Lack of enforcement implies consent or
ambivalence at a minimum.
There are millions of laws on the books in the US, but only something like
.001% are ever enforced and become are so antiquated that we laugh at what
silly laws those were when looking back at them. I am sure the original
people that wrote them had great intents, but history will likely show that
most were knee-jerk reactions to the perceived ill of the moment (like
current hands-free cell phone laws). The act of talking on the phone (or
another passenger) is the distraction, not holding some object in your hand
in almost all cases, yet a ban on talking is impossible to enforce, so they
create a law that they can enforce (holding a phone in your hand), yet it
does not apply to holding a soda, burger, cigarette, picking your nose,
etc. Eventually, Wayne will likely move on to another category or figure a
way to dominate under the new rule set or someone else will find a dominant
strategy in another class and the we will go through all this nonsense
again and be left with crippling rules.
I do not support/endorse any changes to the rover rules, especially the
30/50 rule. The only thing any changes will do is guarantee that Wayne's
group records can never be beat and provide a disincentive to multi-band
microwave rovers, which will translate to lower scores for fixed stations.
> have the guts to review or judge people's actions to see if they are
> within the rules you laid out.
>
I have been sitting on this message for several days, but I agree 100% with
Paul's comments below:
It is interesting to note that there is apparently some disagreement going
on among members of the VUAC. One member being N6NB and another being
W7DHC. I think relative experience and personal biases may play parts in a
person's assessment of a situation. (I worked hard to tame down that last
sentence.)
I would like to point out that a lot of people spend lot of money in
building stations, not just N6NB and his crowd. Actually, I'm not convinced
that they spent all that much money, anyway. I can think of many contesters
who likely spent much more on their stations. Many people who spend a lot
of money on their stations never win the big prize. I don't hear any
sobbing going on about them or by them! Money is not and shouldn't be the
issue.
And, this baloney about circumventing the rules is just that: baloney.
Let's not ever forget this fact: COMPETITORS ALWAYS USE THE RULES TO THEIR
BEST ADVANTAGE. It disgusts me to see all this rabid blaming of winners of
contests. So, now we come down to the "intent." as mentioned in the rules.
Before this wishy-washy word appeared in the rules, there was very little
dissent, over the years, about the rules. Rules were seen to need changes
and changes were made or not made, and contesters did what they needed to
do to follow the rules. Now, we have this word that introduces the notion
that some people might do something that doesn't follow the intent of the
rules. So, who is going to be the judge of what the correct intent means or
that the intent is being followed, eh? The competitor, who will use the
rules to his best advantage or the contest committee who is demanding that
the competitor follow the rules? The big problem here is
not
that N6NB and his crowd is cheating or breaking the intent or anything
else. It's that there are all these guys who are deciding for themselves
that this is going on because of THEIR interpretation of the intent of the
rules and/or motives of the competitor. Bottom line: rewrite the rules in a
straight-forward manner and get rid of rubbery words like intent. If you do
that, people will choose what category to enter based partly on their
realization that maybe they will be beat by so-and-so, rather than,
instead, beating their chest and pointing their fingers at "the rich cheaters."
Don't pass judgement on other competitors and assume you know their motives.
W7DHC got his advice right. I would have prefaced it differently, but, it
boils down to this: Enter the contest to have fun. Try to win a local or
regional part of the competition. Work to bolster your club's score.
Compete against local friends. Work to build your grid count. These are
the things that I do and what
most people do in contests. Above all, remember that with the right
outlook we can all be winners.
73,
Paul, K7CW
73, Robert KR7O/YB2ARO, DM07ba/OI52ee (ex. N7STU)
kr7o@vhfdx.com
www.vhfdx.com (KR7O/YB2ARO homepages)
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|