Review the WPX rules. In point XV, mention is made of unsportsmanlike
conduct as a reason for disqualification.
I have no problem with free speech, whether it agrees with me or not.
I do have a problem with the venue chosen. I think of an amateur
radio contest similar to the Olympics. Politics are put aside for the
sake of the competition. Isn't contesting meant to be that way as
well?
EO6F did the equivalent of walking into Olympic stadium with a
protest banner instead of a flag, and insisted he would not compete
with any athlete from the US or UK unless they denounced the war.
Does he have the right to do this? I think not. This is why I believe
he should be disqualified - because of his unsportsmanlike behavior -
not because I happen not to agree with his opinion. BTW, he was doing
a lot more than just calling CQ NO USA. As K4JA and others commented
to me by off-list email, what they (and I) heard was one of the most
digusting behaviors in our amateur radio "careers."
73,
Barry
On 31 Mar 2003 Jim George wrote:
> I agree with Eric. We might detest EO6F's position, but he hurts himself
> by eliminating the USA quantity and multiplier numbers in the WPX, and
> breaks no contest rule as far as I can tell. Have the USA amateur radio
> operators reached the position where we refuse to allow others to disagree
> with us on political or religious matters?
>
> Jim George N3BB
>
> At 06:16 AM 3/31/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> >Hi Barry --
> >
> > You raised an interesting question which will likely stimulate many
> > messages. I disagree with your recommendation for the
> >following reasons.
> >
> > I didn't operate the contest, so I didn't hear what EO6F said on the
> > air myself. But I don't see where calling "CQ Contest No
> >USA" equates to unsportsmanlike conduct:
> >
> >-- If he chooses not to work USA stations in the contest, his score
> >suffers much more than the score of any single USA station.
> >
> >-- EO6F broke no law or radio regulation.
> >
> >-- EO6F broke no rule of the contest.
> >
> > You and others may not agree with EO6F's operating tactics, or his
> > personal decision to operate the contest in a way that
> >reflects his personal concerns about the war. But is this difference of
> >views a matter that warrants consideration of
> >disqualification?
> >
> > To disqualify someone on the basis of "CQ Contest No USA" (or even
> > something more polemic) can easily be viewed as a private
> >attempt at censoring what can, and can not, be said during the
> >contest. Freedom to express one's opinion is and freedom of assembly
> >with whomever one chooses are among the most basic rights in the USA's
> >Constitution.
> >
> > Disqualifying a contester for saying "CQ Contest No USA" seems both
> > petty and a poor reflection of the principles to which I hope
> >my country aspires.
> >
> >73,
> > -- Eric K3NA
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
> THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!
> http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
--
Barry Kutner, W2UP Internet: w2up@mindspring.com
Newtown, PA Frankford Radio Club
|