[UK-CONTEST] Rule enforcement

[don.field at gmail.com]

It's gone quiet since the early responses to Richard G3CWI'sposting, so I 
would just offer a couple of notes, lest it be thoughtthe Contest Committee 
is not serious about rule enforcement.



1. Bandplan enforcement: I amconstantly impressed by the way that UK 
contesters adhere to thebandplans set out in the contest rules, for example 
the somewhatirritating "gap" on 80m SSB (to conform with IARU guidelines), 
evenwhen the allowed band is pretty crowded. But infringements, 
whetheraccidental or deliberate, do occur and when we have evidence to 
thiseffect we do penalise - there have been several such instances 
duringthis year's CC events, for example, of which the "culprits" will 
beaware!! With the IOTA  contest coming up, I should also mention 
that,last year, infringements were clearly listed in the 
AdjudicationReports (our equivalent of UBN) but not penalised. However, the 
emailto entrants made it clear that in 2008 we will not be so lenient.



2. Bad Signals: VHF contesters willbe well aware that one team was recently 
disqualified for consistentlypoor signal quality. Again, we endeavour to 
ensure that reports of badsignals are not due to poor receivers or 
mischief-making by othercompetitors, but we do what we can to obtain "hard" 
evidence.



Having made those points, I tend toagree with those who pointed out that 
most complaints about contestingrest not on infringements of the type 
listed above, but simply oncontests filling the bands at weekends. I see no 
solution to that -every time a contest is dropped, it seems that someone 
organisesanother one to fill its place. And many of the recent events 
(RussianDX, EU Sprint) are run by special-interest groups, not IARU 
societies,so the only thing that would stop them would be lack of interest. 
As itis, interest levels remain high, so maybe the detractors should join 
inand see what the fun is about!



Don G3XTTContest Committee Chairman