Circular logic...of a sort.
The issue (it appears) is how to ENFORCE the rules...not what the rules are.
So, whether the rule states no more than the amount of power allowed by LOCAL
rules/regulations or no more than 1000watts <period>...HOW do you enforce it?
Rules can be written all day long...but UNTIL there is a method to ENFORCE the
rules...they are worth...well, you get the picture.
Of course, 98+ of the participants hopefully are following both the spirit and
the law. Figure 2% of 4000 entrants = 80 cheaters out of the crowd...
MD
---- N1MM <tfwagner@snet.net> wrote:
> On 10/14/2011 12:06 AM, Ken Widelitz wrote:
> <snip>
> A big amp in the shack is not PROOF of violation.
> <snip>
>
> But there is no reason a rule couldn't be drafted to outlaw amps capable
> of much more than legal power being present during the contest or even
> at any period of time prior to the contest. Proving that a large amp
> is/was present is easier than showing that it is being used to produce
> illegal power.
>
> Contesting is a game, the rules can be anything the sponsor wants. If
> such a rule would make catching cheaters easier, then a sponsor could
> impose it.
>
> Tom - N1MM
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|