CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest
From: "N7MAL" <N7MAL@CITLINK.NET>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 05:38:46 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
WOW I guess my first question is where does this end? Do we start monitoring 
2 meters, or telephone conversations, or even email/regular mail. Anyone who 
is shocked by N2IC's posting is still living in the dark ages. This kind of 
thing has been going on for many, many, years. It is just becoming more 
noticeable with the advent/activity of the internet.
The solutions, as I see it, are to put a 'minder' in each in station that is 
participating in the contest. The next solution is one category for all 
contests, in other words a HP free for all every contest.
Now to be serious, the solution is to create an incentive not to bend the 
rules and I will leave that up to minds much smarter than mine. It has 
already been pointed out there are no rules against chatting in chat rooms 
and there should not be. Instead of beating up and hammering we need to find 
meaningful, positive, incentives. IMHO one of the first things and probably 
the easiest thing is to eliminate the packet-cluster rules and 
packet-cluster categories.(They are useless)
I am sure there are many good ideas out there. We just need to approach this 
problem from a positive point of view rather such a negative/destructive 
point.
Again just my -2cents worth.
73


MAL
N7MAL
BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
http://www.n7mal.com
Everyone in the world is
entitled to be burdened
by my opinion

 

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>