> The acid test of any rule is to publicly break it, then
> invite the authorities to penalise you or to admit the
> rule is no longer in force.
Let's put this idea to the real acid test...
The posted speed limit is 55 mph. (It's the rule)
You blow down the road at 75 mph. (Publicly break it)
Then invite the authorities to penalize you. (Cop pulls you over and writes
a ticket)
Or to admit the rule is not longer in force. (Yeah, try telling that to the
judge)
> If no one is penalised this year, we will know for certain
> that the rule is a lapsed rule
Sorry... nope, you just got lucky, the cop didn't catch you this time. The
rule is still on the books.
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
To: <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Web Poll (Signal reports yes/no)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim George" <n3bb@mindspring.com>
>
>> It might be a silly rule, but it is a rule. As long as
>> it is stated as a rule it should be complied with.
>
> Some rules, as with some laws, lapse - even though they
> are still on the books.
>
> The acid test of any rule is to publicly break it, then
> invite the authorities to penalise you or to admit the
> rule is no longer in force.
>
> It is "silly" to adhere to a "rule" that has long lapsed.
> No one gets penalised in WPX for logging an "incorrect"
> RST. It is not cross-checked, for the simple reason that
> there's nothing of value to check.
>
> If no one is penalised this year, we will know for certain
> that the rule is a lapsed rule in WPX. Then, those who
> prefer to mindlessly repeat 59(9) in every QSO can continue
> to mindlessly repeat 59(9) in every QSO. The rest of us
> can, with a clear conscience, omit it.
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> _______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|