| According to contest rule #7, I protest against the inclusion of UKE Senderen in the contest schedule, and I suggest the station should be deleted The program was a test transmission from a station located in the contest area. Thus, reception unfairly favoured contestants in some areas. Especially the regions within easy reach of the ground wave will be in a strongly favoured position compared to those where ground/sky wave interference is strong. (Sven-Erik Hjelt and several others) |
| We realized that the low power and location within the contest area could be a problem, and we were prepared to delete the station in case of reception being restricted to a certain geographical area. At the same time, however, we were fairly confident that the station would be widely heard. And since UKE Senderen is an unusual station previously not known for its QSL-mindedness, we hoped contestants would appreciate a special broadcast. As it happened, the station didn't get its transmitter on the air within the stipulated period, making further discussion academic. However, a number of persistent contestants kept listening beyond 08.30, and their reports indicate that the station propagated well into e.g. Southern Finland at that time. |
| Radio Douala should be deleted as they did not broadcast within +- 10 kHz of the frequency stated in the contest schedule. (John Ekwall and others) |
| Our proof-reading not being up to standard, the contest schedule incorrectly stated Douala's frequency as 4975, instead of 4795 kHz. Upon discovering this, we first considered deleting the station there and then. But, as there still was some time left before the contest, we decided to try and reach all contestants with a correction through the mail. By definition, this correction can be said to form part of the contest schedule. Radio Douala appeared to be inactive on 4795, so the station is deleted come what may. But in our opinion, if all contestants had received this correction in time, there would be no reason for a deletion to take place. We suggest that future organizers take note of this problem and include provisions for such eventualities in the contest rules. |
| Including a station not mentioned in the official contest schedule - in this case Christmas Island - can be questioned. Even if a contestant managed to pick up all the other contest stations, he may - for whatever reason miss the broadcast with the important station info. (Illka Suni and others) |
| A somewhat similar case to Douala. The VLU2 broadcast was in jeopardy at the time of issuing the contest schedule, but things began to fall into place shortly afterwards. Consequently, when we mailed the Douala correction, we included a warning that contestants should listen out for further details in the R Norway broadcast. In any case, the contest schedule urged that the RNI broadcast might "include important last-minute information about the competition". A few years back, a "mystery station" was part of the competition. The identity was only revealed on the air over one of the other contest stations. In our opinion, VLU2 was virtually a parallel case, and there should be no reason for deleting the station. Alas, nobody heard Christmas Island either, so it matters not one iota. But again, it may be a good idea to provide for such eventualities in the rules, should a similar situation ever occur again in the future. |
| Radio Norway should be deleted in accordance with rule #7. Nils Jakobsson was interviewed on the air, and it must be considered that the station has informed contestants of programme contents. (John Ekwall) |
| Yes - but no. Absolutely not. Granted, Nils Jakobsson did get an inkling of what we were up to when we recorded his interview a few days prior to editing the rest of the programme. But he recieved no guarantees that the interview would actually go on the air. There was plenty of material to be crammed into 14 minutes of airtime, and Nils for some time lived in acute danger of ending up on the editing room floor. Furthermore, had Nils submitted a log containing only the legend "interview with self" and no further details of exact time or further programme content, common sense dictates that his log would have been unacceptable. We have nothing against contestants eyeing the rule book eagerly, and we agree that it is important for the competition to be as fair as possible. But this, frankly, smacks of nitpicking. |
| Här följer protester efter den preliminära prislistan. Kommentarena börjar med om protesten avslogs eller godtogs |
| I should like you to take another look at my New Zealand report. My log contains "sports report at 19.35, and "song by male" at 19.48. This should in my opinion be sufficient for station points to be awarded." (Roland Sigge) |
| (Protest turned down.) As you all know by now, even if a report isn't sufficiently detailed to warrant any programme points station points may still be awarded if the contestant has - in the words of the Contest Rules - "detailed the programme as scrupulously as possible" and "managed to convince the organizing committee that he has heard the station". Clearly, this is never going to be an exact science, and in the end it will always be down to the personal judgement of the organizers. When judging such reports, we have tried to look at all reports in context to arrive at the fairest decisions possible. Much time has been spent leafing through reports and comparing entries. As I'm sure you'll agree, if we were to approve of entries uncritically, it would be less than fair on those who have in fact submitted excellent logs. No points are deducted for listing erroneous details. However, when it comes to judging reports on the basis of general descriptions, the organizers' skepticism will inevitably increase when faced with details which are clearly incorrect. Roland's New Zealand report was one of those borderline cases which have caused us much consternation. Two details match quite well, but he does also list several erroneous details. By comparing his entry with other New Zealand reports, we eventually decided that it doesn't quite match up to the standards required for awarding station points. |
| As I with a 100 % certainty heard ABC Brisbane, I ask you to accept my report. Comparison between your master log and my entry reveals a coincidence which cannot be accidental (Pertti Äyräs) |
| (Protest turned down.) Pertti lists a country & western track at 19.24. This is a fairly accurate description of the Jimmy Bassett song that started at 19.23. Apart from this, Pertti's report contains erroneous details and there are also baffling time discrepancies. When comparing with the other ABC logs, we were never in doubt about upholding our original decision. |
| I would like to protest against my CARACOL log not being accepted. In my opinion, my log matches the times stated in the master log quite well. (Lars Wieden) |
| (Protest accepted.) We agree! When comparing Lars' log with other "borderline cases" which had in fact been accepted, there was every indication that we had been too strict in his case. With the CARACOL points added to his score, Lars advances to 79th place in the final standings. |
| I protest against not getting any station points for FRCN Kaduna, CARACOL and R Nacional Venezuela. It is obvious that I have been listening to these stations. (Hannu Puutio) |
| (Protest turned down.) Unfortunately, it doesn't seem quite so obvious to us. We feel that none of the logs in question are sufficiently detailed to warrant any station points. |
| I would like to protest against my Radio Marumby log not being approved. The log consisted of two details (23.09 song by male and 23. 18 song by female) which were correct. Could there be any doubt that I really heard the station? (Johan Danielsson) |
| (Protest accepted.) When looking through the Marumby reports again, we discovered several decisions which seemed unjustly strict compared to similar reports concerning other stations. Thus, we agree with Johan. And in doing so, we have also spotted three other reports which are almost identical in content, and which consequently also have to be accepted. These reports belong to 120 Mika Mäkeläinen (who advances to 77th place), 007 Bjarke Vestesen (up to 30th) and 017 Anker Petersen (up to 20th place). Johan finishes in 33rd place. |
| For some strange reason, the organizers have turned back on their own rules when judging the WWCR logs. The rules clearly state that "names of presenters or persons interviewed" shall suffice to obtain station and programme points. On the basis of this, I only entered "DX programme with Glenn Hauser" in my log, as I had no wish to spend much time deciphering details which in any case would be of no value points-wise. I maintain that all contestants with Glenn Hauser's name as their only detail should have their logs accepted, and that one programme point should be awarded in each case. (Nils Jakobsson) |
| (Protest turned down.) As I'm sure you all agree, the names of programmes which are aired regularly week in week out, do not count as details in the Championship. In this case, we have a DX programme of exceptional quality, the particulars of which have been widely publicized. It must be assumed that a number of active DXers tune in to this programme regularly. Furthermore, whenever "World of Radio" is referred to in the DX press, Glenn Hauser's name is invariably mentioned. (The 1992 WRTH is but one example.) Often, it is in fact listed as "Glenn Hauser's World of Radio". You could certainly argue that Glenn Hauser's name must be considered as a part of the programme name. Had for instance the Larry King Show been part of the competition, I'm sure you'd agree there would no prizes for guessing the name of the host! As Nils points out, there are no provisions in the rules for such cases, and I grant you that we were probably ill-advised to include this particular programme in the first place. But after lengthy discussions, and bearing in mind that a number of contestants clearly had problems hearing WWCR, we maintain that our original decision is most fair on the majority who did receive the station and provided irrefutable evidence thereof. It should be pointed out that we have accepted all reports listing details, however brief, which do not recur on a weekly basis (or - in the case of the propagation report - cannot be obtained by phone from Boulder, Colorado). We realize that Nils has a valid point, and the organization committe has discussed this problem at length. We welcome further comments to ensure that similar controversies are avoided in the future. In the context of Nordx '91, however, we are prepared to stick by our decision, which must consequently be regarded as final. |
| It appears that you have compiled the KING of Hope master log without any help from the station. You seem to have been guessing the titles of the unannounced music yourselves by listening to the choruses. In my experience, such guesses are often inaccurate, and I maintain that no programme points should be awarded for this unannounced music. (Nils Jakobsson) |
| (Protest turned down.) We did get in touch with KING of Hope, but they could only help us with one of the songs in question. As our master tape was crystal clear, we did indeed arrive at two other titles by transcribing the choruses. We agree that this involves an element of doubt, but we have taken this into account when judging logs. In short, we have accepted all suggestions which appear sensible when compared to the lyrics of the songs. With other stations, e.g. Togo, where our master tape wasn't of comparable quality, a similar course of action wasn't judged prudent. But in this case, it certainly seemed the fairest thing to do. |
| After checking my contest log with the published master log, I protest against the points awarded for my R New Zealand, KING of Hope and R Norway logs." (Lennart Weirell) |
| (Protest turned down.) In fact, none of the details pointed out by Lennart in his protest have counted as separate programme points. Along with a few other people, Lennart has overlooked the following provision in the introduction to the "Station by Station" section: "Please note that even details which do not count as programme points are listed where they may be relevant to a general description of programme contents." We apologize for any misunderstandings. |
| There is no mention of promos in the Contest Rules. Unless a commercial product is concerned, such as the record advertised on ABC, no programme points should be awarded for promos. Furthermore, concerning CARACOL, there is a Granahorrar commercial just prior to the news. This commercial should count, as CARACOL's clock was wrong and the commercial went out after 00.00 UTC. I also feel that I have provided sufficient details to warrant 2 programme points for Radio Nacional Venezuela. (Fredrik Dourén) |
|
(Venezuela protest accepted, rest of protest turned down.) What we perhaps a mite confusingly termed "promos", are commercials where the station advertises itself. We fail to see that a commercial selling an upcoming programme should in any way be inferior as a detail, compared to one advertising for instance a T-shirt. Thus, we cannot agree with Fredrik on this point. By our timekeeping the Granahorrar commercial also falls on the wrong side of midnight, but Fredrik's Venezuela score is a misprint: 2 is indeed the correct number of programme points. Incidentally, we have reprimanded our Latin America expert for not checking the correct spelling of "Carvajal" and "Granahorrar' with Henrik Klemetz' excellent book "Latin America by Radio"... |
| I am surprised that I haven't got any programme points for mentioning the feature about Colombian coffee on CARACOL. (Harald Kuhl) |
| (Protest accepted.) We are surprised too, Harald. The mistake has been corrected. |
| I protest against my WWCR report not being accepted. I also feel that I should have been awarded more programme points for Vedo, New Zealand, Togo and Venezuela. (Rolf Berglund) |
| (Venezuela protest accepted, rest of protest turned down.) Rolf did try to describe the WWCR programme beyond mentioning Glenn Hauser's name, but as far as we can see, none of the details provided match anything actually broadcast. For further comments, please refer to Nils Jakobssons's protest. When it comes to programme points, Rolf has suggested a number of possible subjects for the Venezuela broadcast, one of which was indeed "baseball". This ploy has also been tried by a handful of other contestants, and we are none too happy with reports requiring us to "delete where appropriate". However, despite these qualms, we have decided to add one programme point for Venezuela in Rolf's case. Three other contestants have also had their scores adjusted accordingly, but this has not affected the final running order. Moving on, Rolf has not provided sufficient descriptions to warrant further programme points for Vedo and New Zealand, as far as we can see. Concerning Togo, Rolf's 2 points is the maximum score, so we cannot quite understand what his complaint is here. Unless, of course, he feels able to educate us on the identity of the mystery records played. Venezuela aside, Rolf's protest is not accepted. |