[CQ-Contest] Re: penalty

[Barry Kutner]

On 7 Sep 00, at 11:49, Rajiv Dewan, N2RD wrote:

> Logic:  Make an analogy with speeding.  If only a few perps are caught
> then the penalty needs to be high so as to set an example/modify
> behavior.  This need not be so if a perp is caught almost surely.
> 
> Assuming that penalties arise from carelessness (under control of the
> operator) and othe causes (not under control of the operator), very
> high penalties will cause people to "overinvest" or become obsessive
> about controlling errors.
> 

To paraphrase a Seinfeld joke:
You're driving down the road at 55 mph, you see a sign showing a 
list of speeding penalties: 0-10 mph over limit $60, 10-15 mph over 
$80, 15-25 mph over $125, etc. So, you decide to drive 69 mph 
thinking to yourself "I can afford that."

Same thing with contesting. The question is how much risk are you 
willing to take, and how many "uncertain" calls are you willing to 
log? Obviously, the contest sponsors want us to have perfect logs 
because the penalties are stiff for busted calls.  A perfect log is 
unlikely. However, there are conscious steps we can take to 
minimize penalities, as already outlined in this thread.

You may not like it when you just broke 2000 Qs or you just broke 
4 Meg in your claimed score, and it's reduced 10% after log 
checking. But, to remove 3 QSOs per busted call is fair (though we 
may not like it) because the rule applies to all. 

Another analogy - if you know the IRS audits every tax return sent 
in, and charges a $3 penalty for every $1 disallowed, would you be 
more careful, and less "creative," before sending it in?

73 Barry
--
Barry Kutner, W2UP              Internet: w2up at mindspring.com
Newtown, PA         FRC         alternate: barry at w2up.wells.com


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com