[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] 2006 Pa QSO Party Plans

To: CW Sanders <no5w@consolidated.net>,CQ-Contest Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 2006 Pa QSO Party Plans
From: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 16:45:06 -0400
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Oct 13, 2006, at 1:31 PM, CW Sanders wrote:

> And although PaQP now accepts entries by email they require that a  
> hardcopy
> summary sheet be sent by regular mail regardless of how you submit  
> your
> logs! What's up with that? Failure to do so will result in entry being
> classified a check log.

        Here is the reason:

        Last year, we only required in-state logs to  submit hardcopy  
summary, and the result was that almost 40 percent of our logs came  
in without a summary at all. Since we generate the preliminary scores  
from the summary sheet, that meant that those logs had to be checked  
before the preliminary results were published, and put us *way*  
behind schedule.

        When the preliminaries are late, the section awards and other awards  
are held up. The plaques can't be ordered. There is a ripple effect  
the whole way along the post contest  process.

        I had a choice of DQing that huge amount of logs, or reverse  
checking them to make a summary and trying to straighten things up  
for the next year.

        When trying to figure out just why that happened, I think perhaps  
that emailing a log is  almost too easy, and maybe some people just  
didn't give as much thought to the process as they might have otherwise.

        At any rate, we are trying to get a handle on the process. I want  
things to happen on time, not 2 months late.

        - 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>