[CQ-Contest] Remove that Word!
Paul J. Piercey
p.piercey at nl.rogers.com
Thu Jun 12 15:35:52 EDT 2008
I've made that suggestion numerous times. If you can't define it, get rid of
it. Seems simple enough to me.
73 -- Paul VO1HE
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ward Silver
> Sent: June 12, 2008 15:23
> To: CQ-Contest Reflector
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Remove that Word!
> > Ron is correct. If the contesting community cannot agree
> what "Assisted"
> > means, it's fruitless to try to fabricate contest rules.
> (Sorry Randy)
> > This term needs to be defined first, then the rest will fall into
> > place. And I don't think the contesting community can define it for
> > the contest sponsors (Sorry again Randy). The
> > needs to come from the sponsors themselves.
> > 73 de Bob - K0RC in MN
> I've got a better idea - how about we get **RID** of the word
> entirely? It is far too vague to be of any use when we are
> really talking about sources and movement of information. I
> suggest SO and SO-Unlimited if we're to have two categories.
> If three, then SO, SO-Plus, and SO-Unlimited.
> Then the sponsors can state the definitions and there won't
> be any arguing about what constitutes "assistance." The next
> debate will be about what "single" and "operator" mean, of course.
> Even better - maybe the categories should be named Red, Blue,
> and Green so the category name is removed from the debate
> completely and thoroughly.
> 73, Ward N0AX
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest