I hate the idea of an SS database. It rewards the poor op who can't copy, in
some cases he or she just accepts the defaults and takes his chances with the
log-checking process. Personally, I don't believe this will help my score one
bit - I'm pretty good at parsing together exchange fragments and applying the
result to what I'm hearing. However, I felt the same way about
super-check-partial too...
Bill framed the question pretty well. However, I personally don't care whether
this will sell even one more copy of NA. While I think there are other things
we could spend our time on more productively, I would code this feature if the
serious, active, NA users want it.
As Bill pointed out, maintaining this database will require some work. Somebody
needs to collect logs and crunch the data. I am willing to write programs to do
the crunching, but someone else will have to do the work.
Is this something that should just apply to SS (i.e., precedence/check/section)
or will the users demand that it be expanded to Sprint (name) IOTA, grid square,
or some other data? Where does it end?
Dave
--
Submissions: na-user@contesting.com
Administrative requests: na-user-REQUEST@contesting.com
WWW: http://www.contesting.com/datom/
Questions: owner-na-user@contesting.com
|