I have no problem with the regulation that requires competitors to be available for judging, but I do have a problem with this one: 1f2) All competitors must be available for scrambling, if needed by organisation team. Penalty: disqualification of the competitor for the competition. What if they don't know how? I know many people (especially beginners) who do not know how to scramble.

To be fair, many competitors probably don't know how to properly judge, either. It should be up to the organizational team to choose volunteers they trust to be competent. Nobody's making them pick someone who doesn't know or isn't comfortable with scrambling.

Well, if they're familiar with the regulations, then they'll know how to scramble. I'd prefer to leave the rule in, to prevent people from feigning ignorance.

if they can't scramble, maybe they can judge. judging is easier now, so I guess with a little "training" most people can do it. and you probably don't need everybody in the competition to help, so...

[quote="Bob":dso4kg4y]I have no problem with the regulation that requires competitors to be available for judging, but I do have a problem with this one: 1f2) All competitors must be available for scrambling, if needed by organisation team. Penalty: disqualification of the competitor for the competition. What if they don't know how? I know many people (especially beginners) who do not know how to scramble.[/quote:dso4kg4y] I agree with Bob. Maybe changing the "must" to "should" will be suffice?

"2t) Before the competition all competitors should make themselves familiar with the WCA regulations." But, it would be illogical to disqualify a competitor without at least teaching them how to scramble so that they can.

Anyone who can read cube notation would know how to scramble 3x3 with minimal training. Not too much of a problem there. But it would be unreasonable to expect most newbies to know how to scramble less popular puzzles like square-1, or even big cubes, and it would be silly to disqualify them because of that. Not that anyone would be disqualified under such a situation, but the current regulations seem to allow for it.

[quote="Shelley":284e428g]Anyone who can read cube notation would know how to scramble 3x3 with minimal training. Not too much of a problem there. But it would be unreasonable to expect most newbies to know how to scramble less popular puzzles like square-1, or even big cubes, and it would be silly to disqualify them because of that. Not that anyone would be disqualified under such a situation, but the current regulations seem to allow for it.[/quote:284e428g] Yeah, that was sort of my point. I agree with Ilkyoo in changing "must" to "should."

i agree that you should judge but not scramble, especially begginners who never went to a competition. I was at my 1st one on sunday, and i didn't knw what to do =/

Decisions on disqualification for a competition are made by the WCA delegate. We should trust the WCA delegate to only disqualify competitors on fair grounds after some investigation. Ron

I, too, support the idea of changing "must" to "should". /Anders

OK, changed to 'should' for version 2009 draft 1.