> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ev Tupis
> Sent: December 12, 2006 23:49
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] An attempt at a foundational
> understanding [was: Icansee the difference...]
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>
> > So...it appears that the reality is that you're a "bad guy"
> > if: (1) the event rules say that you can't do what you did,
> > (2) you did it anyway, (3) you submit a log that disadvantages the
> > score-placement of a "good guy". In a world that lacks absolutes,
> > this is the only possible outcome. :)
>
> Aye, there's the rub.... IF the rules prohibit it! They do not.
> ---------------------------
>
> Then you aren't a "bad guy". We must trust in what you said
> above. You never identified the contest, so it is impossible
> to offer any further input.
>
> One final factor to consider: There is always the chance
> that the adjudicator-of-the-month may interpret the rule on
> assistance more stringently than you do. Sadly, you won't
> know until it is too late.
>
Whew! I glad I'm not bad. Especially this close to Christmas.
Considering that final factor, if the contest adjudicators make arbitrary
decisions about the rules of their own contests on a random basis, then what
hope have we got? If I got DQed because someone suddenly decided that a
practice considered 'de rigeur' since the inception of the contest was now
prohibited, and did not make that change abundantly clear in the updated
rules for that contest long before the contest was to take place, what would
be my incentive to enter any more of that sponsor's contests?
73 -- Paul VO1HE
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|