CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Web Poll (Signal reports yes/no)

To: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>, cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Web Poll (Signal reports yes/no)
From: "Tom Haavisto" <kamham69@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 14:47:47 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
The problem I have with this stance is that the rules for the contest
require it.  Failure to send one (meaningless or not) means you did not
follow the rules (silly or not).  Don't expect a lot of sympathy if your log
is tossed for failure to follow the rules.

Don't like the rules?  Don't participate.  Want the rules to be different?
Have the contest sponsor change the rules, and then they will (again) be the
same for everyone.






> The acid test of any rule is to publicly break it, then
> invite the authorities to penalise you or to admit the
> rule is no longer in force.
>
> It is "silly" to adhere to a "rule" that has long lapsed.
> No one gets penalised in WPX for logging an "incorrect"
> RST.  It is not cross-checked, for the simple reason that
> there's nothing of value to check.
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>