[CQ-Contest] Preview Draft of 2013 CQ WW Contest Rules

[brian coyne]

It does occur to me that this thread has 'much  ado about nothing' to quote that universally known Bard of a few centuries ago.

I very much doubt there have been any visits in recent years. in fact probably not since the first year it was implemented when there was a lot of publicity about needing sponsorship to fund the visits and the outcomes of the visits caused some controversy.

That was in times of the old regime, and I would guess that they did not have the appetite to repeat it, no doubt someone will correct me if I am wrong.

Under new leadership, new drives and ambitions, the nettle is about to be grasped again and it ain't gonna be easy.

Just hold off until we see the devil in the detail and meantime if there are any suggestions put them forward during this consultation period.

73  Brian 5B4AIZ / C4Z.




               



________________________________
 From: Bob Naumann <W5OV at W5OV.COM>
To: 'Ron Notarius W3WN' <wn3vaw at verizon.net>; cq-contest at contesting.com 
Sent: Tuesday, 4 June 2013, 15:06
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Preview Draft of 2013 CQ WW Contest Rules
 


All of these concerns are without any basis in fact. 

The rule does not stipulate anything regarding any of these "non-trivial"
questions.

There is no reason for anyone to presume that:

1) They will be subject to this
2) That the CQWW would be totally unreasonable in applying the rule
3) Any of the imaginary scenarios would ever become reality

Everyone has been able to operate for the last 4 years under this rule
without any concern.

What it shows me is that no one has paid much attention to the rules until
the current proposed re-write has been made public.

Exactly as I expected.

W5OV

-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ron
Notarius W3WN
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 7:50 PM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Preview Draft of 2013 CQ WW Contest Rules

OK.  

In light of both W5OV & N2MG's comments (both included below)...

I understand that the intent of the rule is that the "top" competitors agree
in advance that they must allow an inspection during the contest.  No
argument there.  

My question is simple, in light of the current wording of the rules (as per
Mike's post):

Exactly how does the competitor get contacted?

This is not a trivial question.  Consider that the rule, as worded,
indicates that there could be penalties due to a "failure to respond."

Now, imagine for the sake of discussion that I am using another person's
shack for the hypothetical contest weekend.  An observer is sent to my
house... but I'm 150 or so miles away in another corner of Pa... or even
another state in Zone 5.  And it so happens that no one is home that weekend
(maybe the family is with me, maybe they're elsewhere).  So there's no one
around to tell the observer where I am.

Could I be DQ'd under these circumstances?  As the rule is worded, it's
certainly possible.  Especially if there's another competitor who IS being
deliberately evasive, because they're up to no good... and then complains
that both of us are technically in violation of the rule, so why was he
punished and I wasn't?

I would humbly suggest that the rule be clarified to indicate that it would
apply only in circumstances where the competitor in question is being
evasive... not for circumstances where the competitor can not be located in
time due to any of a number of reasonable circumstances.

...yes, I realize the rule has been rarely used in recent years, and that
most of the stations who were visited where well known & easy to find.  But
one needs to try and allow for the Rule of Unintended Consequences,
especially as rules are interpreted by new members of the committee or
contest community over the years.

73

-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
w5ov at w5ov.com
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 10:35 AM
To: Juan Hidalgo EA8CAC
Cc: k5zd at charter.net; Albert Crespo; Rex Maner; Martin Durham;
cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Preview Draft of 2013 CQ WW Contest Rules

Tap the brakes, guys!

There is nothing about signing up or registering before the contest in the
rule! All commentary about this is complete conjecture!!

The issue is being willing to allow inspection - should someone official
show up at your door during the contest!

The likelihood is pretty minimal as I'm sure you can imagine.

The rule has been in place for at least the last 4 years.

Chill out!

de W5OV
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Mike Gilmer, N2MG
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 10:16 AM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Preview Draft of 2013 CQ WW Contest Rules

>>looking for clarity on how competitors notify CQ

The rule:
"A competitor who wishes to be judged for a top score in their
category must agree to being visited at any time during the contest by
an observer appointed by the CQ WW DX Contest Committee.
Failure to respond to the Committee request or to allow a Committee
appointed observer full access to the operating location during the
contest period may result in the competitor being removed from award
eligibility for 3 years."

The rule, as I read it, says, in effect, that the committee contacts
YOU.  And it doesn't appear to eliminate the possibility they might
even simply want to "drop in" with no warning.

Mike N2MG
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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

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