The bottom-line issue here has to do with "sportsmanship" and understanding
the true meaning of certain words and phrases being used in this discussion.
As was said during the recent U.S. presidential campaign; "don't tell me
words don't matter"!
Peer Pressure:
1: -noun
social pressure by members of one's peer group to take a certain action,
adopt certain values, or otherwise conform in order to be accepted.
Reference: Dictionary.com Unabridged Based on the Random House Dictionary, C
Random House, Inc. 2009.
2: n.
Pressure from one's peers to behave in a manner similar or acceptable to
them.
Reference: The American HeritageR Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth
Edition Copyright C 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
3.
The social influence a peer group exerts on its individual members, as each
member attempts to conform to the expectations of the group.
Reference: The American HeritageR New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third
Edition Copyright C 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Please note: not one mention of "embarrass" or "ridicule" or any similar
term.
KY1V said: Now consider the fact that this is an amateur of another country,
another culture, an amateur who's (sic) personal beliefs may be entirely
different than our own. Do we have a right to call these people derogatory
names, such a "cheerleaders" (which mind you is derogatory in this context)?
Is this the image we want to portray as amateurs? Not me.
Again, from Dictionary.com:
Cheerleader
n.
One who leads the cheering of spectators, as at a sports contest.
One who expresses or promotes thoughtless praise; an adulator.
Reference: The American HeritageR Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth
Edition Copyright C 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
I think the definition of cheerleader as reported in the American Heritage
Dictionary is completely appropriate, accurate and certainly not derogatory.
KY1V said: I think this cheerleader report is the most distasteful form of
cheap entertainment obtained from K1TTT's report.
In contrast to this opinion, K1TTT's report is an admirable example of the
self-policing nature of amateur radio.
There's a good summary of self-policing in an article entitled "Self
Policing" by K5WTH where he says (among other things):
"Nobody likes a snitch, especially the one who is snitched on.
"Narc, snitch, stool pigeon." All of those names conjure up stereotypes that
are belittling. But think about this: The issuance of federal credentials,
our radio license, comes with the expectation that we will all be policemen
of sorts."
Reference: http://www.mail-archive.com/aren@mailman.qth.net/msg00057.html
You could say that K1TTT is an "OO" (Official Observer) or "policeman of
sorts" in the context of contesting. He reports to the contest community
about its behavior. He has no obligation to do so, and he spends a great
deal of his personal time to make amateur radio and specifically amateur
radio contesting better. Instead of this being described as cheap
entertainment, it should be correctly described as benevolent and admirable.
This debate could spin off into a discussion of our global society as a
whole, and how the concepts of peer pressure and the complete lack of shame
as a motivator impacts society negatively today. There are plenty of
articles published in the mainstream media on these subjects and we do not
need to belabor these off-topic points here.
73,
Bob W5OV
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|