I have been away and "reading the mail" and now have the time to comment
I am not afraid to act on this one and did so in 2003. I observed a
well-known (and TOP 10) USA contester chasing packet spots all Sunday afternoon
during a CQWW SSB contest - to me there was NO OTHER WAY this station would
have been able to "miraculously find" some first-time mults on 10M - within 2
seconds of them having been spotted! It happened on Saturday afternoon as
well but Sunday's observations were quite pervasive.
I did what any one SHOULD DO and wrote to three members of the CQWW contest
committee expressing my observations and some specific stations worked and the
times I heard the QSO's take place.
It is a VERY LONG story, but some friends (who have been quite vocal on this
topic on these pages this week) wrote to me and suggested perhaps I was
wrong to have reported the individual and that "I should have asked the
individual first etc etc".
I elected NOT to do that because what I heard was a CLEAR-CUT PRIMA-FACIE
CASE OF BLATANT CHEATING - and because of that, there was NO WAY I could have
been mistaken - nor should I have given the station the "benefit of the doubt"
which I was also criticized for for NOT DOING.
In this case, I think the committee had no hard proof and I know most of the
CQWW members and their policy (as I understand it) is, in the absence of
hard evidence, their hands are tied - even if there are questions about the
specific operation. This is a very fine line we are talking about here folks
and I DO NOT BLAME THE COMMITTEE for being CAUTIOUS before just DQ'ing people.
In this specific case, no penalty was exacted - the station was not DQ'd -
although, I did later approach the station involved myself (I did NOT
initially) and I told him what I had heard - I did this, if for no other
let him know I KNEW WHAT HE DID - others were told on the committee - and if
nothing else, I hoped he would cease and desist going forward, knowing he was
now probably on the "CQWW Committee WATCH LIST." I am pretty sure such a
defacto list exists - although these things do not usually ever get discussed
So what do we do here?
1) Don't cheat!
2) Play by the rules
3) If you hear someone you think is cheating, please DO REPORT it to the
CQWW committee for investigation and a ruling - that's what they are there for!
4)You'll have to decide whether you want to confront the person you are
accusing - and if you do, you damned well better be sure - because YOU WILL
A FRIEND IF YOU DO!
In my case, this station has not spoken two words to me in 4 years as a
result - but that is not important to me.
I did what I had to do - to me there was NO OTHER OPTION - and I ask that
the rest of the contest community consult first your conscience - then "DO WHAT
YOU KNOW SHOULD DO IF YOU THINK IT'S RIGHT!"
Hope this helps.
And no, I am not interested in flames.
I have said my last on this topic.
(And please do not write to me privately to ask who it was - the individual
involved already knows who it was and I do hope he has changed his ways!
Naming names at this point serves no useful purpose.)
**************************************See AOL's top rated recipes
CQ-Contest mailing list