[UK-CONTEST] HF CW Field Day / G0CKV

Thu Apr 19 02:18:42 PDT 2012

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Don Field <don.field at gmail.com> wrote:

> Semantics Stewart. There used to be a divide between "correspondiong
> members" and "full members" of the committee. The latter attended meetings,
> the former did the backroom work. But as 99% is done by email now, it makes
> sense for everyone to be on the Committee reflector, as most of the
> correspondence is about things like "can you advise on how I put these
> results on the webpage" or other practical matters like that. Relatively
> little is about policy.
>

Unfortunately the operational model of the CC is not well known to the wider
community and that is part of the problem.

Now is there a rule that participants are not allowed to adjudicate?

Do you consider setting the rules as policy, or operations?

How do you make sure that rule changes are set against a wider policy
and decisions do not advantage members of the committee?

What is the current overarching CC policy?

>
> As it happens, we already publish provisional results for the IOTA contest,
> with two weeks or so for appeals and have done for the past few years. But
> for some events (like the 80m CC events) it would be nonesense, as the idea
> is to turn the results around before the next month's event. Horses for
> courses.
>

However, there are many other contests that do not fall into that class:
VHF, CW and SSB NFD, four AFS contests etc etc. These annual and not
monthly contests but they do not follow the IOTA model. Is there a plan to
make the IOTA model the norm?

Stewart/G3YSX

>
> (The above is not an "official" committee reply - just my observation on
> what actually happens at the moment)
>
> Don G3XTT
>
> On 19 April 2012 08:17, Stewart Bryant <stewart at g3ysx.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Don
> >
> > However the committee do not NEED to be the adjudicators, they
> > only NEED to be the oversight body for the adjudicators.
> >
> > Ideally, the adjudicators should be picked from a larger
> > pool of volunteers. The participants should be excluded
> > from adjudicating a contest, and the logs and adjudication
> > report should be put in the public domain for two weeks
> > for scrutiny before the result is finalized.
> >
> > I am sure the pool of adjudication volunteers is much larger
> > than the pool of committee volunteers.
> >
> > I know that work in the past required wading through heaps
> > of paper, but we do not live in the past.
> >
> > Stewart/G3YSX
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 18/04/2012 17:16, Don Field wrote:
> >
> >> The Committee IS the adjudicators Stewart. In years gone by that's all
> >> they
> >> did (pretty much) - wading through heaps of paper logs was enough in
> >> itself. It's only since computers have made adjudication quicker (and
> more
> >> accurate, despite some recent postings on here) that there has been time
> >> for philosophical discussions of contesting policy - I guess it must
> have
> >> happened in the past but probably 50 years ago and then put to bed.
> >>
> >> Don G3XTT
> >>
> >> On 18 April 2012 15:52, Stewart Bryant<stewart at g3ysx.org.uk>  wrote:
> >>
> >>  More of the committee work should be done in the public domain
> >>> and not behind closed doors.
> >>>
> >>> There is no reason for a large ctte if the contest design happened
> >>> by consultation, and there is no reason why the adjudication pool
> >>> should come exclusively from the contest ctte.
> >>>
> >>> Stewart/G3YSX
> >>>
> >>> On 18/04/2012 10:45, Chris G3SJJ wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Adrian, obviously there would need to be a vacancy created by someone
> >>>>
> >>> leaving the Contest Committee. The are currently 17 members covering
> VHF
> >>> and HF
> >>>
> >>>> events. I guess if one of them resigned, the position would be
> >>>>
> >>> advertised in RadCom, and/or on this Reflector.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> In some ways you may be correct about "by invitation," in that if, say
> >>>>
> >>> for example, Q G3WRR left, they may want to look for an experienced CW
> FD
> >>>
> >>>> person to take over, or again if one of the VHF guys left the same
> could
> >>>>
> >>> apply.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Could I also suggest that sarcastic comments wouldn't particularly be
> >>>>
> >>> helpful in getting positively noticed to work in the team!
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Chris G3SJJ  (Member of the former HFCC 1985-2000)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 17/04/2012 22:34, UK Contest wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I have been waiting for news about SSB FD rules, and now take it that
> >>>>>
> >>>> this years event will use the previous rule set.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> I can get on with planning my entry.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Turning to Olof's comments, I agree with his observations and
> comments.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I hope that that they are noted !
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> By the way, I am still waiting to understand how people get onto the
> >>>>>
> >>>> RSGB HFCC. As far as I can make out its by invitation. Is this what
> Olof
> >>> means by " back room deals among a privileged inner circle" ?
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Who do I get th
> >>>>>
> >>>> e invite from then ?
> >
> >>
> >>>>> 73
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Adrian MW1LCR / GW9X
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ______________________________**_________________
> >>>>> UK-Contest mailing list
> >>>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> >>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-contest<
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  ______________________________**_________________
> >>>> UK-Contest mailing list
> >>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> >>>> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-contest<
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> ______________________________**_________________
> >>> UK-Contest mailing list
> >>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> >>> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-contest<
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest>
> >>>
> >>>  ______________________________**_________________
> >> UK-Contest mailing list
> >> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-contest<
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest>
> >>
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>