[CQ-Contest] CAC ..... was "radio-sport.net web site or copy and paste journalism

Bob Naumann W5OV at W5OV.COM
Sat Sep 24 03:30:56 PDT 2011


Ed,

While I understand the desire here, but the point is that this is a
committee. 

The committee has to do its job and having the public involved in debating
every idea or opinion expressed in their discussions is just not reasonable.


If you think about the potential of how out of control that could get, it
becomes obvious how impractical it would be.

We have forums like CQ Contest and others where the public can express their
opinions freely - and they (we) do. The CAC members are painfully aware of
public opinion. 

I'm sure that each CAC member's inbox is filled with all sorts of reminders
of same.

The results of the committee's work are public record and this is really all
that's required. Specifically, in the case of the CAC, they have essentially
no power to enact anything. Even if they did come up with some totally wacko
idea, they only submit it to the ARRL BoD, who will either use the CAC's
input or reject it. They (the BoD) have ignored the CAC in the past, and I'm
sure they will in the future. I think that from reading WC1M's report, he's
doing an admirable job and keeping the focus where it needs to be. It's too
bad that one or more members of the committee are apparently seeking to
destroy the CAC from within and undermine their valuable work (sacrificial,
volunteer & unpaid work). 

If everyone needed to be involved in the inner workings of the CAC, then it
could be done away with totally and instead, just do everything based on
polling of the entire contest community here on CQ-Contest.

Yes, that sounds like a great idea. (Not).

73,

Bob W5OV

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Edward Sawyer
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 7:06 AM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] CAC ..... was "radio-sport.net web site or copy and
paste journalism

I agree with part of W5OV's statement.  If they agreed to secrecy, they
should be tied to it.  However, if the group does disband and get re-built,
it's the perfect time to change it to transparent.  Personally, I believe it
should be transparent.  This isn't the United Nations Security Council
folks.its contesting.

 

If rules of a very popular contest are being proposed to be changed, the
voice of the ones enjoying it every year are pretty important voices and
deserve to be heard.

 

By the way, let me be the first to vote NO on changes to the ARRL DX contest
as we know it and YES to starting up a new contest that is conceived by the
collective wisdom of this group.  One more series of DX contests would have
my vote.  And if it wants to be distance based, work everybody, only be 24
hours, (pick your favorite topic here), go for it.  I vote for April.

 

73

 

Ed N1UR

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



More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list