Sylvan,
With all due respect, you're on the wrong page if you think that contest
sponsors do so to promote world amateur harmony. Maybe they should, but they
don't.
There are many reasons to sponsor a contest but at the core is a singular
purpose: to promote the organization.
I see nothing wrong with that. I see nothing wrong with having to buy CQ to
see the results of a CQ contest. I see nothing wrong with the ARRL offering
a sneak peak to those people who actually pay the bills. If taxation without
representation is wrong, isn't also representation without taxation an
affront to those who are taxed?
This isn't discrimination. To call it so is a grave insult to all the people
in the world who truly are victims of discrimination. Someone has to pay the
bills and I see nothing wrong with giving the people who do pay the bills
the right to a perk like early posting of contest results.
73, kelly
ve4xt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sylvan Katz" <jskatz@sk.sympatico.ca>
To: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@MB.SYMPATICO.CA>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Re: ARRL Discrimination
> Hmmm. Am I missing something?
Perhaps.
Line results should be free and immediate. It is the cost the sponsoring
organization incurs to encourage participation and maintain harmony in the
community. On the other hand, value-added things such as commentary and
analysis should be charged for on a fee-for-service (subscription) basis.
Very simple logic for a very simple problem.
.. sylvan
Ô¿Ô¬
----------------
Sylvan Katz, VE5ZX
Saskatoon, SK
"A Novel Perspective of Amateur Radio Contesting" at
http://www.dynamicforesight.com/~ve5zx
|