This is not about the definition of a boat.  It’s a trophy with the designated purpose of encouraging participation, camaraderie, a general esprit de corps within the class.  The OA knew your circumstances, some competitors did as well. Even if they did not, they were glad you were there.  One more competitor is what everyone wants.  You were just what the trophy was created for.  

  I fear that a 70 degree swing of a mast head does not fit “ROW’s full range of reasonable sailing.”

Perhaps consider what happened on the other end of the mast first.

Full trim > No trim in a short period.  - - That is the range of reasonable sailing I'm referring to.  What happens as a result is just that.. a result of reasonable sailing.

Set TWD (mag)
Leg#  Mrk1 Mrk2 Bearing TWA(p/s)  Dist

That could easily fit width wise on a phone. 

When setting the marks, if they are govt marks hyperlinking to details regards bells/flash height etc .. avail as a pop-up will keep the list clean. 

Richard, thank you for your open minded response, but i agree with Sue that relaxing the promptness of the hail and RRS 44 penalty requirements would be undesirable.

One of the purposes of the suggestion was to reinforce the requirements for prompt hail and prompt response.

If you let go of those requirements you will get into all sorts of disputes about:

AIUI the purpose of making the respondent (not a word in this RRS) field mandatory is that the system automatically messages that entity that they are the subject of a hearing.  Naming a boat there will make it appear that that boat has been protested.

Wouldn't a better solution for requests fo  redress be to either omit the respondent field or make it non mandatory, and message the race committee that a request has been received in every case?