KR2Q:
> For those of you who don't like point one (no directional CQs), you have
to
> put it in context of the forum here on the reflector.
I don't agree. This forum isn't a contest. The real "forum" is what
happens when we put our butt in the chair for next contest.
KR2Q:
> My "gut" reaction is the same as most of you....there is nothing wrong
> with Directional CQ's.
Hold that thought, including the part about "most of you".
KR2Q:
> HOWEVER....in the context of the discussion and airing of options with
"what to do when, if,
> etc. " which MIGHT occur (my emphasis) ....
"Might occur"..... I've heard the old saw about "might makes right", but
never before this one about "might makes wrong"!
Because "might makes wrong" is based on "logical thinking founded on nearly
30 years on "some" contest committee", perhaps we should examine the
"logic" (I was going to say examine the "tortured logic", but George W.
Shrub says we can't torture our logic anymore).
KR2Q:
> If you don't understand why point 1 is important, then you should reread
all of the discussion
> that has taken place here.
I took your advice and reread all of the discussion. The whole argument and
the "logic" goes like this.
1) Gentlemen don't use directional CQ's because some passer-by else MIGHT
tell them the QRG of the object of their desire.
2) The CQ'er then MIGHT follow up on that information.
3) Successful followup MIGHT put the Q into the Gentleman's (or is he only
now ranked as "80% Gentle"?) log and that'd be WRONG.
So you can see, "Might Makes Wrong" is not an accurate premise. The
premise should correctly be stated "Might CUBED Makes Wrong"
KR2Q:
> but it makes perfect sense in the context of "how to fix this."
What is it, exactly, that is broken?
KR2Q:
> Just think about it this way....if the "top ten-ers" already do this or
will do this, and you
> don't agree and make the top then, explain your logic of not agreeing
when "everybody else"
Remember when I asked you to hold that thought about "most of you"? How
did that morph to "everybody else"?
KR2Q:
> Think about it and then decide.
I've thunk and thunk till I'm MIGHTY weary of thinking, and all I've thunk
up is this.
"Might makes Right" and I'm right and you're wrong
Proof? You want proof? I can provide the mathematical proof.
It is obvious, even to top-tenners, that the opposite of right is left and
that three lefts make a right or 3l = r.
It is also clear that wrong is the opposite of right so -w = r.
So this would make 3l = r = -w which means that 3l = -w. Now, since left is
the opposite of right (-l = r) this would mean l = r = -w, which playing
with the math gives me l = -r = w and so left is the same as wrong (yes, I
could have done this in fewer steps, but I didn't feel like doing that).
Now, since l = w and 3l = r that would make 3w = r. This means that three
wrongs make a right. Of course, since 3 is an odd number, this situation
doesn't work out with any values for r and w except 0 which would mean that
r = 0 and w = 0 and l = 0, although the last one I don't really care about.
This means that right and wrong are mathematically identical and so
classifying things as right or wrong is pointless because both of them are
the same. And since there is no difference between right and wrong, that
would make ME always right and YOU always wrong.
73 es beep beep,
de Hans, K0HB
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|