[VHFcontesting] What was the true intent of the changes?

[Ev Tupis]

--- On Sat, 7/26/08, Jim Worsham <wa4kxy at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Frankly, I am taking a wait and see attitude on this.  All
> we have now is a sample of exactly two contests (January and
> June) and a bunch of controversy based on some comments made
> in one entrants soap box.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Jim,

The intent of the rules changes is honorable -- there is no question in my mind on that fact. People volunteer to be members of the VUAC because they want to make things better. Sadly, their input is "digested" by folks who may have a different set of priorities.

The VHF contesting community is faced with constant drama and agitation because the premise on which the Rover category rules were originally penned was fundamentally flawed.

The original flaw has been amplified by follow-up rules modifications, resulting in a Rube-Goldberg-like Rover Rules system (a Rube Goldberg machine is a deliberately overengineered apparatus that performs a very simple task in very indirect and convoluted fashion. - Wikipedia)

The solution will become evident only if/when the powers-that-be see the situation for the Rube Goldberg Machine that it is.  Until then, expect the topic of Rover Rules to continue to surface, regularly.

Regards,
Ev, W2EV