Sounds sensible to me Eric and Randy.
Tod, K0TO
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Eric
> Scace K3NA
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 10:11 AM
> To: Randy Thompson K5ZD
> Cc: Cq-Contest
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] rules
>
> Hi Randy et al --
>
> We are seeing a blizzard of rules proposals and
> counter-proposals.
> But we don't actually know if there is a "problem" yet with
> CW skimmers.
>
> Rather than changing rules, let's do this:
>
> 1. For the next two years, when reporting a score, also answer this
> question:
> "Did you use a CW Skimmer or its equivalent?"
> This question applies to all entrants: single op and multi-op.
>
> 2. Publish the line scores with a mark indicating the answer
> to that question.
>
> 3. In 2010 June, review the results of the past two years to
> determine
> a) Does the use of a CW skimmer have a material impact on scores?
> b) If yes, do the award categories need to be changed in
> some way?
> Or is disclosure sufficient?
>
> -- Eric K3NA
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|