All the discussion about log checking and what transgressions shalt be dinged
has omitted one aspect of the sport which I maintain is unique and should
strongly color its adjudication. Radio contesting consists of cooperative
interactions between the participants. It is not all of us shooting at
individual targets or knocking each other down (well, mostly) or running ahead
of everyone else. The winners are the ones that have the most successful
two-way exchanges of information with other participants.
Because of the two-way requirement, judging must be based on the satisfaction
of that requirement by BOTH parties. While you may bemoan the occasional
incompetence of the other participant, that does not affect the requirement to
complete and record a valid interaction. In fact, this goes back to the
original intent of contests as ways of enhancing communications skills of all
involved.
All of the scenarios put forth over the past couple of days, even though blame
may not lie with the party which is ultimately penalized, are examples of a
failure to complete the valid two-way exchange of information.
This does add an element of strategy in that I need to judge whether I am
likely to have a valid exchange with someone that calls. We have all told a
very weak caller, "Later", when it becomes clear that we are unlikely to be
able to copy their information. If someone calls in using their new
Vibro-Bugamatic and can't send the letter "E" correctly twice in a row, then I
will probably not log or their QSO or log it with zero points. The balance
must be struck between risk of penalty and the desire for additional points -
that's why we don't just blow off everyone that isn't Q5.
It is to the credit of the log checkers that ONLY in cases where it is clearly
demonstrable that the QSO was invalid with a high degree of probability is
credit removed for the QSO. It is completely true that the penalty is not
always assessed in strict compliance with the proportion of blame - just like
in real life. (one of which we should all attempt to get) It is also
completely true that these methods are applied equally to all competitive
entries and that the results are neither secret nor unchallengeable. If a
better methodology can be demonstrated that can be acheived with the limited
resources available, then I think it would be considered. Until then, the
present methods are, as has been pointed out, the gold standard.
This reminds me of a great George Carlin-ism - "Isn't it amazing that everyone
that drives faster than you is an idiot and everyone that drives slower is a
moron?"
73, Ward N0AX
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
|