To: | Mike Fatchett W0MU <w0mu@w0mu.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Eliminate SO Unassisted? |
From: | David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com> |
Date: | Mon, 16 Jun 2008 13:13:41 -0700 |
List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
Enforceability is irrelevant. We already have all kinds of rules that are impossible to enforce. It's impossible to detect if a single op is getting help with mults from a second ham in the shack. It's impossible to detect if someone is running excess power. It's impossible to detect if someone is scanning the band to make of list of callsigns and frequencies during a mandatory off period. It's impossible to detect if someone is checking the DX Summit history after the contest to correct their logs for callsign accuracy. I'm sure I could list a few more. Rules set boundary conditions for honest players ... rules don't stop the cheats. Dave AB7E Mike Fatchett W0MU wrote: > > Why create rules that are nearly impossible to enforce or prove? > > _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
Previous by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] single-op pornography, Warren C. Stankiewicz |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Eliminate SO Unassisted?, David J. Sourdis |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Eliminate SO Unassisted?, Mike Fatchett W0MU |
Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Eliminate SO Unassisted?, David J. Sourdis |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |