[CQ-Contest] Improper WPX Exchanges

[Sandy Taylor]

Well,
I'd say that the proper way to effect changes to the rules are:

1. Write a letter to the sponsor.
Didn't work? then take it to the next level:
2. Build inertia in the wider community, also known as a petition.
If that didn't work, then:
3. Vote with your feet. If enough people feel as you, then enough people
will boycott that the sponsor will have no choice but to listen.

If not enough people carry the protest to No.3, then you have choices:
accept that you're in the minority and work within the rules, or continue to
vote with your feet.

Unilaterally deciding to flout the rules isn't the answer.

And this is from someone who agrees that the mindless exchange of 59(9) is
just that, mindless. Do I think it's a strong enough platform to build a
campaign on? No. Will I sign a petition against it? Perhaps. Would I boycott
in support of that position? No.

73, Kelly
Ve4xt

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Paul O'Kane
Sent: March-30-08 6:53 PM
To: CQ Contest
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Improper WPX Exchanges

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "N7mal" <n7mal at citlink.net>

> I am also in favor of leaving the rule in place
> because it gives the casual contesters a small
> 'breathing' space before they enter the number.

You underestimate the skills of casual contesters.
The only breathing space they need is to hear their
own call - that tells them they're supposed to 
copy whatever is next.

How do casual contesters manage in contests with
no RST - like Field Day or SS? 

> It also sets a bad example for the beginners

The bad examples are the mindless repetition of
59(9), and the requirement for it to be exchanged
in the first place.  If CBers did this, you would
laugh at them.

73,
Paul EI5DI

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest