Yep, now we're on the same page.
And, by all means (well, not ALL but you know what I mean), work me if you
can. :)
73 -- Paul VO1HE
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Robert Naumann
> Sent: December 2, 2006 13:56
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Little old ladies changing tires
>
> While I have a great desire to extinguish silly threads here
> on CQ-Contest, I must comment in dissention with this alleged
> "real world logic".
>
> The issue here is not receiving some information and doing
> something with it; it is *how* you came to receive the
> information. Did you solicit it from others in any way? Did
> you pre-arrange for someone to provide you with additional
> information? If you answer no to these two questions, your
> operation is not assisted.
>
> Anything available to you on the air, *** without you
> soliciting it from others in a pre-arranged or planned
> way***, should be fair game. The obvious preclusions to this
> are already in the rules specifying connecting to spotting
> networks etc.
>
> Just like you can tune to 10MHz and listen to WWV as a single
> op to get an idea of propagation and not be assisted, hearing
> something randomly mentioned by someone else on the air
> during the contest should be considered equivalent to WWV and
> not be considered any sort of assistance - in this context -
> of being at risk of reclassifying your operation as assisted.
>
> Perhaps the wording of all contest rules needs to clearly
> indicate that the assisted activity must be planned,
> pre-arranged, thought out in advance, coordinated with
> others, or something else meaning the same thing to remove
> all possibility of classifying truly randomly gained
> information as an assistance to your operation. Perhaps the
> category needs to be changed to something like: Single OP
> with Planned Assistance.
>
> The slippery slope comes in where you link the definition of
> assisted to what you do after the information is gained from
> the proper place of what you did **PRIOR** to getting the
> information. The distinction must be focused on your intent -
> not your reaction.
>
> The example of announcing that you need VO1 is a great
> example that is probably worthy of further discussion and
> debate. What is your intent here?
> Have you planned with anyone else to locate a VO1? No. What
> if a VO1 calls you based on one of these "directional" CQs?
> Would this be OK? I am inclined to allow this as *NOT* being
> assisted since it is an activity you have undertaken on your
> own, on the air, real-time, during the contest, and you have
> not pre-arranged for it. Calling a directional CQ during a
> contest should not be precluded for unassisted single ops.
>
> Let's say you do need VO1, and you don't say anything about
> it. Then someone works you during the last 5 minutes of the
> contest and randomly mentions that VO1 is up 5 in case you
> need it - isn't this clearly different as there is no intent
> or plan to extract or seek that information from anyone else?
>
> Again, if someone tells you that the VO1 is up 5, what do you
> do? Ignore the
> VO1 because you now know about it through no action of your
> own? Why not? I see nothing wrong with this or unethical in
> any way. Why penalize your own score for something you had
> nothing to do with and didn't ask for?
>
> This is so binary to me I am struggling with how it is not
> commonly understood.
>
> 73,
>
> Bob W5OV
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tree [mailto:tree@kkn.net]
> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 2:15 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Little old ladies changing tires
>
>
> K4BEV writes:
>
> > A little old lady has a flat tire...
> > She changes the tire herself = Unassisted
> > She calls AAA and they come out and change the tire = Assisted
> > A Good Samaritan stops and changes the tire for her = Unassisted?
> >
> > Using the above logic she must have been unassisted since
> she didn't ask
> for
> > help, even though she accepted it.
> > Using *real world logic*, if you accept assistance you are
> no longer
> > unassisted.
>
> It's this kind of common sense logic that often extinguishes
> some of the
> more silly threads on CQ-CONTEST.
>
> Of course, you could talk about the tow truck driver who
> didn't see the
> old lady - and someone slows down and rolls down the window saying:
> "There is an old lady back a mile who needs a tire changed".
>
> If the information is acted on - the guy doesn't get to claim he found
> her by himself.
>
> So - that's the key. Did you QSY and work the station based on that
> information?
>
> This is why even positioning yourself to get the information
> by telling
> the world you are looking for VO1 isn't a good idea. Once
> someone tells
> you about a station - it makes it hard to go work them even
> if you do find
> them on your own.
>
> Just work the contest - maybe you will miss a mult. I did in
> the SSCW.
> Life goes on.
>
> Tree N6TR
> "Crabby 40 meter HC8N Operator" (hence to be reduced to C4MHO).
>
> PS: What about sending VV for "33" - anyone have a problem with that?
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|