Let's not take this statement out of context.
I shall rephrase so that the context becomes more clear.
Anyone that believes there was reason to publicly embarrass PU2FAN is a
disgrace to amateur radio. PERIOD!
Again, this could have been handled privately with the same effect, but
it seems too many of my fellow contesters are too caught up in this
cheap form of public entertainment to realize that public ridicule is
unnecessary.
Even Dave states " So, which would you prefer, that I forward the data
to the black hole of contest log checkers and hope that something is
done, and where I will never hear the outcome... or publish the
information so action can be taken right away to prevent continued
cheating, either intentional or otherwise??", which clearly shows it's
more about knowing that something was done than trusting the sponsors..
Is that the real problem? No one trusts the sponsors? Do we know become
an unruly mob, taking all matters into our own hands? If you don't trust
the sponsors, replace them or form an oversight committee!
Think as you may, and use whatever dictionary you wish, but the fact
remains that calling people "cheerleaders", which in American society is
typically pictured as a female in a skirt, I hardly see the comparison
between a "cheerleader" and someone who spots his friend on an
expedition 46 times during a contest.
Using Roberts dictionary definition of cheerleader; One who leads the
cheering of spectators, as at a sports contest, I disagree that the
spotter is leading any of us to join in the act of cheering and it is
quite evident that no one is participating by cheering with him,
therefore, the term is definitely used in a derogatory manner.
I never stated that K1TTT's report is not valuable as a tool to catch
cheaters. For those that have not been able to ascertain my objective, I
will spell it out.
It is HOW WE USE the report that I am concerned about. If Dave simply
turned over the report to the contest committee, or a newly formed
ethics committee, whom further investigated each incidence and took
appropriate action after having both confronted the accused AND further
investigated the facts, then I am perfectly fine with publishing the
names and calls of those that are caught cheating and refuse to stop.
But as it stands, it seems that many of you prefer he turns the reports
over to everyone so that each person can take whatever action he/she
deems appropriate.
David ~ KY1V
As some with interests in communication in general, beyond ham radio
contesting, may have noticed, my (infrequent) comments have tended to
focus on the debate about the debate, i.e. the "metadebate", rather than
the debate itself. Responses have tended to be private, and generally
too subtle for general release (by apparent sound judgment of those
responding).
However, I'd like to call attention to the following declaration. Most
will recognize it:
"Anyone that believes otherwise is a disgrace to amateur radio. PERIOD!"
So, taken literally, someone may fall into the disgrace category,
presumably deserving of residence in the 5th or 6th level of Inferno,
based on a belief. It's shocking to imagine that someone I respect and
regard as a credit to amateur radio might instead be a disgrace based on
a belief that hasn't even been expressed!
May I request a moratorium on similar pronouncements? I don't have a
right to demand anything. It is just a request. Such statements are
extreme, dogmatic, grandiose, inflexible, and display a lack of desire
to consider alternate views (including, presumably, this one).
I'm just seeking to elevate the level of civility of the debate. That's
all.
Rich K2WR
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|