[CQ-Contest] rules

[Tod -ID]

Sounds sensible to me Eric and Randy.

Tod, K0TO

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Eric 
> Scace K3NA
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 10:11 AM
> To: Randy Thompson K5ZD
> Cc: Cq-Contest
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] rules
> 
> Hi Randy et al --
> 
>    We are seeing a blizzard of rules proposals and 
> counter-proposals.  
> But we don't actually know if there is a "problem" yet with 
> CW skimmers.
> 
>    Rather than changing rules, let's do this:
> 
> 1.  For the next two years, when reporting a score, also answer this
> question:
>    "Did you use a CW Skimmer or its equivalent?"
> This question applies to all entrants: single op and multi-op.
> 
> 2.  Publish the line scores with a mark indicating the answer 
> to that question.
> 
> 3.  In 2010 June, review the results of the past two years to 
> determine
>   a)  Does the use of a CW skimmer have a material impact on scores?
>   b)  If yes, do the award categories need to be changed in 
> some way?  
> Or is disclosure sufficient?
> 
> -- Eric K3NA
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest