On Thu, 6 May 1999 05:40:36 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>
>Guy Olinger, K2AV writes:
>>
>> There is an alternative:
>>
>> TWO-WAY ACCURACY BONUS for each end of a qso with all elements correct
>> at both ends.
>>
>> ADDED TO the scores by the log checking programs. No more penalties
>> except for DQ for the usual kinds of ugly, on purpose stuff. Zero
>> point busted QSO's.
>>
>> Publish the bonus portion of the scores with the scores. Looks at
>> accuracy in a POSITIVE way.
>
>I do not see how this is any diffrence than the
>current system.
Currently there is nothing that rewards for both directions being
correct. If I shortchange the other guy while I'm running and he can't
get back to me for corrections, I loose nothing. I identify
infrequently and cause call sign problems at the other end, I don't
get penalized, he does. If I get the bonus only when BOTH he and I are
correct BOTH ways, maybe I take some interest in practices that also
improve the other guy's chances.
Also, maybe not yourself, but a lot of people are PEEVED at the
negative flavor of penalties. Why NOT cast something positively if we
can? World is full of negative stuff.
>
>When I went to school there were some teachers that
>scored tests by starting at 100 points and taking
>points AWAY, others started at 0 and ADDED points.
>
>I guess one method could be said to be positive and one
>negative but I don't think many of the students
>were fooled into thinking these were any diffrent.
Agree with you on school exams.
>George Fremin III
73, Guy
--. .-..
Guy Olinger, K2AV
k2av@qsl.net
Apex, NC, USA
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|