Over the last several years, the Canadian government
has spent billions of dollars creating the gun registry,
believing that if all the guns in Canada are registered,
gun-related crime will drop.
Hmm. Of course, the criminals in Canada -- thugs,
drug dealers, mobsters -- were lining up out the door to
sign up...
I'm just wondering how removing packet from
contesting will cut down cheating. Packet exists to
service more than contesters, so there will still be
spots to be had. It seems all this will do is just create a
different brand of cheater. I can hardly believe that a
cretin who thinks nothing of wrongly classifying himself
as SO will have the slightest apprehension about
continuing to use packet.
And, if honourable contesters can't watch packet, will
they still spot? If they don't, then it diminishes packet for
non-contesters -- who aren't bound by our rules unless
they submit a log but use DX contests to pad award
totals.
If we need to work more than just those submitting logs
-- and we do -- and we make contests a less inviting
place for those folk to do business, are we not simply
diminishing contests for ourselves?
Perhaps once we figure out a way to remove packet
from contests we could also figure out a way to
de-invent the A-bomb...
73, kelly
ve4xt
> From: "k4ww" <k4ww@insightbb.com>
> Date: 2004/04/01 Thu AM 05:09:23 CST
> To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
>
> "KU8E wrote:" The packet issue has been discussed
for a long time and it
> seems to me that the majority favor removing it from
contesting. Now it's
> time for the contest
> sponsors to react...."
>
> Majority = a number greater than half of a total
>
> If you think that more than half the participants in
any/all contests favor
> removing packet assistance from contests, I fear you
are sadly mistaken? If
> you think that more than half the participants, that
participate in this
> reflector, are in favor of removing packet assistance
from contests, I
> suspect you are correct? Fortunately, or unfortunately,
depending on ones
> position, a very small portion of contest participants
participate in this
> reflector, and are vocal about their opinions? The
contest sponsors bear the
> responsibility of enforcing the rules? The participants
bear the
> responsibility of complying with the "current" rules?
The technology is
> available to insure that both are complied with?
> If "we" have arrived at the point where, "I have
observed all competition
> rules as well as all regulations established for
amateur radio in my
> country. My report is correct and true to the best of my
knowledge. I agree
> to be bound by the decisions of the Awards
Committee", means nothing, IMHO,
> "we" have reached a "sad state of affairs"?
>
> C'Ya, Shelby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
> THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on
professional DVD and VHS!
> http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
___________________________________________
____
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
---------------------------------------------------------------
The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!
http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|