I have read with interest the thread on this subject. While I got my
first taste of contesting in the 70's, most of my time has been spent
DXing. It has only been in the past 4-5 years that I have tried to make
some serious efforts at DX contesting. Most of my efforts have been as
single-op assisted, and I have watched this area of contesting mature.
As it has matured, the rules have been, for some of the larger contests,
modified and clarified. This has occured because the envelope in this
area of contesting was not only pushed, as it should be, but, in the
estimation of some, torn assunder by a wiley few who sought extra
advantage. The result was discussion and eventual clarification of what
is, and is not, legal in this realm of contesting. This whole process,
while a bit messy, struck me as exactly how it should be, given the
ever-changing technological environment in which amateur radio
contesting exists and also given both the competative nature and, what
seems to me, almost boundless energy, of the avid contester.
This brings me, finally, to the point of my posting. While it may be an
oversimplification, there seem to be essentially two types of contester.
One type looks at the rules, sees what is permitted, and that is what
they do. The other looks at the rules, sees that is not prohibited, and
develops his strategy from there. This leads to all the debate regarding
the "spirit" of the rules versus the exact text of the rules. And all
the e-mail in the world will not change how each side feels nor will any
rules changes stop the discussion. It will simply create more
discussion. All in all, I think this tension is good. It makes us look
at our hobby, think a bit, and even, as in my case, shift from a chronic
lurker to a contributor. My best to all. Steve, NN4T.
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|