[PaQSO] Rules & details

[Kay Craigie]

To accommodate change, creativity, initiative, and all those good things,
plus to be fair to the software authors who need time to incorporate changes
into their programs, it would probably be a good idea for the contest rules
to be given a thorough review *after* this year's event is over. That would
give the sponsors an opportunity to think about input received and clear up
any major points of confusion that have developed as the contest has
evolved.

However, let's don't kid ourselves that even if the rules were 10 pages long
they could address each and every little thing and do so in a way that
satisfies and pleases everybody. In writing rules, the more you specify, the
more you *have* to specify, as you try to anticipate every possibility, list
everything that is and is not okay, close every loop-hole, and prohibit
every trick that would take unfair advantage. The rules start looking too
much like income tax form instructions and too little like something that
would lead to fun and good sport.

Take a look at the rules for the major DX contests, for example, and you'll
see what I mean. They are extremely detailed, probably *have* to be
extremely detailed, and they are a pain in the neck both to administer and
to obey.

Rules that are too general and aren't updated periodically cause controversy
and confusion. Rules which are so detailed that you have to ask your lawyer
to explain them to you don't strike me as what we would like our state QSO
party to have, either. There's a Goldilocks point ("not too hard, not too
soft, just right") in there somewhere, though it may not be easy to find and
stick to. 

I hope I'm able to work W3UU often enough to have to worry about how to log
them -- fortunately, WriteLog is pretty accommodating that way.

For PAQP 2004, I think I'm ready to stop having opinions and start having
fun.
73 - Kay N3KN