On Dec 6, 2008, at 6:43 AM, David Robbins K1TTT wrote:
> Unfortunately nobody else gets to learn from those silent events.
> If no one
> learns, someone else is bound to try to repeat that method of
> cheating. By
> exposing them publicly not only do others learn that those methods
> are not
> allowed, but it also allows peer pressure to be applied in cases
> that may
> not rate a dq. This has helped stop some who either didn't know
> what the
> rules were, or had misinterpreted them without official action...
> hopefully
> making them better contesters in the future.
>
So much depends on temperament I guess. I'm not going to publicize
everyone I DQ.
My own "laws" are simple. If I determine that honest mistakes
happened, I instruct in private. If I determine that cheating took
place, the Op no longer submits a log in my event ever, no appeals.
One strike and you are out. But they are going to hear that from me in
private also.
If I make it a big public event, scarlet lettering the Op, I had darn
well better be 100 percent sure that there was active and intentional
cheating going on. Defamation of character anyone? Before I do public
outing, I will need multi million dollar liability insurance. Other
organizations that I have headed had those policies on me in order me
to perform the job.
If people want to play vigilante, then they can have at it. But let us
not kid ourselves that it is better than a simple "you're out of here"
delivered in private. There are a fair number of people in this world
who find this active sort of punishment a challenge.
-73 de Mike N3LI -
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|