The Rules Subcommittee has responsibility for matters related to the ARDF regulations applied to ARRL-sanctioned competitions, including:
- Defining and maintaining a rules document for application to ARRL-sanctioned events.
- Soliciting and evaluating input from ARDF participants, organizers, and referees.
- Emphasizing fair play, simplicity, and the promotion of ARDF within the USA, above all other considerations.
- Coordinates with IARU Region 2 ARDF Coordinator or Working Group to ensure compatibility with regional rules.
Some examples of questions the Rules Subcommittee should ponder:
- What issues affecting fair play need to be addressed?
- What rules changes might help address barriers to entry to the sport?
- What rules changes might increase youth participation in ARDF?
- How to make the rules more readable for a US audience?
- What commonality with Region 1 rules needs to be maintained in order to ensure ARRL-sanctioned events support a well-prepared Team USA?
Those and similar considerations are all within the Rules Subcommittee’s realm of responsibility. When potential solutions are identified, the subcommittee is empowered to act. Possible subcommittee actions include:
- Direct action by members of the Rules Subcommittee itself.
- Submitting recommendations to another subcommittee or to the full ARDF Committee.
- Requesting information from the ARDF community using a poll or email list.
- Posting information to the ARDF community on a web site, email list, or group.
Some concrete examples of possible subcommittee actions include:
- Submitting a USA rules change proposal to full ARDF Committee vote.
- Coordinating with the Sanctioning Subcommittee to ensure sanctioned events will conform to a proposed rule change.
- Polling the ARDF community for rules opinions and suggestions.
- Communicating USA rules changes to the IARU Regional ARDF Working Groups or Coordinator.
First Thing: A Simplified ARRL ARDF Rules Document
Officially, the IARU Region 1 ARDF Working Group’s ARDF Rules documents have been applied to USA ARDF Championship competitions, with specific deviations from those rules published in advance. In fact, however, many of the 21 pages spanning two documents of Region 1 rules have little or no application to ARDF as it is practiced in the USA today, and were simply ignored. For example, rules pertaining to the jury, team meetings, starting order selection, and protests.
Other rules could be better written for our purposes, such as event reports, media service, entries, cost, and participation, to name a few. For USA competitions, a single rules document of 5 pages might be achievable.
For USA competitions, a single rules document of 5 pages might be achievable.
But too much brevity can lead to confusion, particularly if the succinctness is achieved partly through the use of an arcane nomenclature. A glossary of terms can avoid much confusion and ambiguity without contributing bulk to the meat of the document.
A glossary of terms can avoid much confusion and ambiguity.
Four appendices dedicated to the four types of events would improve rules organization while removing some classic event-centric verbiage that doesn’t really belong in the body of the rules document.
Four appendices: each dedicated to one of the four types of events.
Using American English terms and punctuation would make the rules more readable to the majority of Region 2 English speakers.
Use American English terms and punctuation for improved readability in our hemisphere.
Other Considerations
The Rules Subcommittee should consider the issue of receiver sensitivity described in this blog post. Ensuring adequate fox radiated power could be key to making at least some ARDF events more affordable to newcomers.
The issues related to fair play where the use of GPS is concerned should also be examined.
Before it becomes effective, the ARRL ARDF Rules document that the Rules Subcommittee creates must receive a majority of a full ARDF Committee vote. Once approved, the rules need to be published for all to see, on a web site like this one.