So,
Who is 'forcing' you to share secrets Ron? (Rhetorically speaking)
And to your earlier comment about logs being 'work product' to some? So
contesting is WORK now? I always thought it was FUN? And most definitions of
'work product' reference to definitions of Attorney work product not being
discoverable...hmmmm...
73,
W1MD
---- Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net> wrote:
> That may well be, but FORCING someone else to share their "secrets" is the
> very antithesis of healthy.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ed Muns
> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 9:03 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] public logs
>
> Art, K3KU, wrote:
> > Yes, this has been discussed many times before. (And it will
> > probably come up again, sigh!) One valid (IMHO) reason NOT
> > to have public logs, even if you are not fudging, is that it
> > would reveal the secrets of your operating success. (At
> > least that's the theory. At my level, there are no secrets
> > worth hiding.) But not everybody agrees that operating
> > secrets make a difference.
>
> Of those operators who believe there is value in reviewing past logs, some
> hold the view that "sharing secrets" is healthy for radiosport and its
> participants. Sharing your successes motivates you to enhance your
> operating skill further to remain competitive. This is good for the
> individual and the hobby.
>
> Ed - W0YK
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|