Jeffrey Steinman wrote:
>You could get carried away segmenting typical error rates by category and
>coming up with different penalty structures. I don't advocate that - and I
>don't know what the "right" percentages and associated penalty should be.
>While I think the 3 QSO penalty should become a SK, accuracy should always
>be rewarded over inaccuracy.
Which is why I am REALLY beginning to like the bonus point scoring system
that someone on here proposed. Each QSO is worth one point. However, if
the logging software verifies the QSO in both station's logs each station
gets an extra point. If it isn't confirmed (as in the other station
doesn't send his log in), you get one point. If it is a busted Q, then
you get zero points.
This incentivizes BOTH stations to be accurate and rewards the accuracy
that a good op will have.
73,
Jon
KE9NA
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|