Then the paralimpic games also should not be politically correct. But they
are, indeed. Numerous people take part in them without feeling assaulted.
People having hearing difficulties or so need some assistance by means or
decoders. No problem with that, let them use decoders. Other people might
need other kind of assistance. Let them have it. But let them all just
state, they were assisted. There is no need to create any more new
definitions.
Why it is such a problem for an assisted operator just to declare, he is
assisted?
73,
Vladimir VE3IAE
---
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Robbins" <k1ttt@verizon.net>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Revised 2011 NAQP Rules
> inadequate and not politically correct... you need a better definition
> that accounts for those who are either physically or mentally unable to
> copy by ear, or by eye, or by typing what they can see or hear.
>
>
> Jan 3, 2011 09:06:57 PM, w4pa@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> W5OV:
>
>>The focus instead should be "what are the characteristics of an unassisted
>>single op"?
>
> Ear, not eye.
>
> Scott
> W4PA
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|