[CQ-Contest] Easy way to correct answer

[Michael Coslo]

On Nov 13, 2006, at 8:54 PM, K6VVA wrote:

> Hey, folks...this is not Rocket Science.
>
> My 2 cents about the way the SS Exchange Rules *should* have read  
> (also
> considering my own recent Paradigm Shift):
>
> ===
> 4. Exchange: The required exchange consists of:
> ===
>
> Make that: The required exchange MUST consist of, and include,  ALL  
> of the
> following component segments in exactly the sequence as described  
> below
> (4.1 + 4.2 + 4.3 + 4.4 + 4.5 - in that order).  Violation of any of  
> the
> following exchange rules will automatically disqualify the  
> participant.
>
> ===
> 4.1. A consecutive serial number;
> ===
>
> Make that:  A consecutive serial number, beginning with number  
> "001" (Zero
> Zero One) in each separate SS event. You are prohibited from  
> starting with
> any number other than Serial Number "1" (or "001").  Cut" number
> substitutions are NOT allowed (i.e., the letter "T" can not be used in
> place of a "Zero"), however for serial numbers "001" through "009",  
> the two
> leading zeros may be omitted.  For serial numbers "010" through  
> "099", the
> one leading zero may be omitted.  Sorry, but history dictates that  
> we can't
> formally delete any leading zeros from the serial number, but we can
> informally "overlook" their omission.
>

	First, and most glaring is that you start with saying 001, then   
then you say 1. Your whole paragraph about t e serial numbers is  
confusing. One should never put justification in the rules.

	You start out well, with a simple MUST statement, statement,  
although I would suggest that you don't put it in caps.


	What about multi op multi transmitter stations? (only applicable to  
contests with such a class)

	Under your system, does an omitted QSO disqualify a person? I had a  
computer problem once, and the darn thing wouldn't


> ===
> 4.2. Precedence;
> ===
>
> No change to the following:
>
> 4.2.1. "Q" for Single Op QRP (5 Watts output or less);
> 4.2.2. "A" for Single Op Low Power (up to 150 W output);
> 4.2.3. "B" for Single Op High Power (greater than 150 W output);
> 4.2.4. "U" for Single Op Unlimited;
> 4.2.5. "M" for Multi-Op;
> 4.2.6. "S" for School Club;

Mostly clear.


>
> ===
> 4.3. Your Callsign;
> ===
>
> Make that:  Your Callsign, however participants using a Precedence  
> of "Q"
> are specifically prohibited from appending "/QRP" to their  
> callsigns during
> any SS event.  Violators will be prosecuted.

	How you gonna prosecute them?


>
> ===
> 4.4. Check (the last two digits of the year you were first licensed);
> ===
>
> Make that: Check (the last two digits of the year you were first  
> licensed
> as an Amateur Radio Operator).  Absolutely no substitutions of "first
> licensed" dates may be made by any participants, for any reason. If  
> you do
> not know the year you were "first licensed", you are prohibited from
> participating in any SS event because of your stupidity.


	Okay, I get the drift here.


	You don't have the Exchange for multi-op stations. Is the exchange  
the individual operator's and changes when another Op takes over? Or  
is it the station callsign issue date. This is important for  
verification. Let us ay it is the individual operator's date. What  
happens then if an unlicensed person is operating with a control Op  
persent. Is it then the control Ops date, or if it is a club is it  
the club license?


	By the way, you miss one extremely important point here. You cannot  
prohibit any licensed amateur from participating in any event that  
they are otherwise qualified to participate in. You can only refuse  
to accept their log. This came up when an amateur sent in a fake log  
to the PAQSO party a couple years ago.

Unless you are going to promote a shunning by publishing a list of  
Ops to be shunned.

	Then I suggest retaining a lawyer for the rules committee 8^)



>
> ===
> 4.5. ARRL/RAC Section
> ===
>
> Make that:  *YOUR* ARRL or RAC Official Section where you physically
> operate the SS event with any/all radio equipment and antennae
> used.  Absolutely NO other Section name or abbreviation may be
> substituted.  Rules pertaining to "Remote Station" operations where  
> two
> different ARRL/RAC Sections are involved have not yet been decided  
> upon, so
> please don't do this yet.
>
> (Example: NU1AW would respond to W1AW's call by sending: W1AW 123 B  
> NU1AW
> 71 CT, which indicates QSO number 123, B for Single Op High Power,  
> NU1AW,
> first licensed in 1971, and in the Connecticut section.)

	This is not clear. Does this mean any deviation is treated to a DQ?  
What if I say please copy and then your exchange?



>
> Although History calls to "tow-the-line" in this matter, we will  
> provide a
> degree of "Latitude" for the use of creative, QRM-busting phonetics as
> substitutions for the official ARRL or RAC Section names.

	What a strange rule! And it isn't really a rule. All you are doing  
is saying that you'll allow (some) unusual phonetics? This is very  
vague, and will lead to a lot of problems, such as:

	What is that degree of latitude anyhow? This implies that there are  
some phonetics that you won't allow. And since in an earlier rule you  
note that :


>> Violation of any of the
>> following exchange rules will automatically disqualify the  
>> participant.

	I want to know just *what" phonetics are not allowed.

	Also, since you refer to QRM busting, does this mean that under  
normal conditions that standard phonetics must be used?

	Are straight alphabetical callsigns permitted?


>
> (Example:  If you operate from the Arizona, USA ARRL Section  
> ("AZ"), you
> may use phonetics like "Astro Zombie", etc., as long as the individual
> words equate to exactly the Alphabetic characters of the official  
> ARRL or
> RAC Section names in sequence.  CW SS participants must send  
> exactly the
> same official ARRL or RAC Section names via intelligible International
> Morse Code (use of American Morse Code in any CW SS event is  
> Prohibited).
>

	Better define intelligble regarding that CW. I know some Ops who say  
they can't copy slow code any more- their minds wander.

In addition, you deviate from the "degree of latitude" statement you  
had earlier. Does this mean that anything goes regarding phonetics in  
the Section, but not the exchange?


>
>
> Did I miss something?


	My overall comments:

	Putting examples in rules is not good. You'll soon be putting more  
examples in.

	Your overall tone for these rules is rather condescending. I would  
hesitate to participate in any contest where references to  "your own  
stupidity"  (rule 4.4) are  mixed in with the rules.

	Specificity has it's price. The more specific you get the more  
specific you must be. And you can never be specific enough.

	I would read that this is a contest for the elite, and that the  
sponsors are more worried about disqualifying people than people  
operating in the contest. I'd probably find something else to do that  
weekend! I would assume that my finding something else to do would be  
a good thing as far as the sponsors were concerned.

	Wouldn't it just be better to have a brief set of rules that set up  
the contest, then let people get on the air and use their common  
sense? If questions arise, the contest sponsor can answer the  
question, and clarify the rule. I do this all the time, and it works  
pretty well.

Let me give an example:

	In our party, we have county line stations, which give out 2  
multipliers. Many county lines have their borders along rivers. So  
someone wanted to know if they operated from a canoe in a boundary  
river, if they were both a county line and maritime mobile?

Answer was they were county line only.

Then the question was Does the station have to be exactly on the line"?

Answer: Many county lines are in the middle of rivers and on roads.  
While the ideal situation is that the antenna and station cross the  
county lines, this would often put the Operators in harms way. To  
have the county line nearby, meaning as close as possible while  
maintaining safety and comfort for the Ops will suffice.

Then the question was Is proof needed? Should county line stations be  
required to submit their GPS coordinates?

	The answer: Don't be ridiculous!  At some point you just have to  
trust people. If someone wants to furnish those coordinates, that is  
fine. It is worth pointing out that there are a few small disputes  
regarding county lines in PA. You might notice it when you are  
driving during the winter, and there is a small patch of road that  
isn't getting plowed, or paved like the other sections.

	I'm happy to answer any questions, but the day that I have to write  
stuff like that into the official rules is the day I get a new hobby.


	Still trying to kill this thread...... ;^)

-73 de Mike KB3EIA -