[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet

To: "George Fremin III" <geoiii@kkn.net>,"Yuri VE3DZ" <ve3dz@rigexpert.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
From: "Russell Hill" <rustyhill@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:46:12 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
For me personally, my station QTH is a long way from any power, cable, phone 
lines, or any other reasonably convenient access to any sort of internet or 
packet info, unless I choose to set up a VHF link, or spend money just to 
have internet access.  I have no packet access, nor do I  want it.  My 
choice, I know.

So I do not want to be forced to compete against operators who use packet to 
get the assistance of other operators.  I agree totally that anyone who uses 
packet is a Multi-operator.  IMHO, anyone who uses packet and calls himself 
a SO, unassisted, is lying to himself or cheating.

Obviously, if the rules permit packet use by "Single Operators" then it is 
not cheating.  But only if the rules explicitly permit it.

Rusty, na5tr

"Just a guy with a radio"  and of course I use a computer, amp, rotator, 
antenna, Rigblaster, etc., but absolutely NO ASSISTANCE from any other 
operators.  I enjoy the challenge of seeing what I can do by myself!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George Fremin III" <geoiii@kkn.net>
To: "Yuri VE3DZ" <ve3dz@rigexpert.net>
Cc: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 10:59 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet

> On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 02:08:26PM -0500, Yuri VE3DZ wrote:
>> I don't like Dx Cluster, but the reality is - like it or not - almost
>> everyone is using it nowadays, one way or another. I mean 99.9 % of the 
>> HAM
>> stations have the capability of using Dx Cluster today.
>> So, why not just allow it for all categories, like it was done for WAE or
>> Russian DX long time ago?
>> What are we afraid of here?
> I do not think it is fear.  It is that I do not find it as
> much fun to do the contest as assisted and if everyone is
> in the assisted category than I have to make the choice of:
> - Run packet and not have as much fun.
> - Not run packet and be at a disadvantage.
> So - I guess most would end up running packet and the non-packet way
> of operating disappears.  That would sadden me.  I and others could
> keep going on without packet and see how well we do against others
> that use packet.  That has it's own appeal.  I already do this in
> other contests - but usually it is that I am trying to achieve a
> better score than the multi ops.
> It would also mean that places that do not have a way to get packet at
> all or easily are at a disadvantage.  (they do still exist - even if
> it is only a few)
> But as others have pointed out - why stop at packet?
> Why have any categories at all - just put all the scores in a big
> pile.  This is not a new idea - we could just list them in score order
> from the M/M DX to the QRP/poor antenna stations.  We will just assume
> that they all use high power and packet.
> -- 
> George Fremin III - K5TR
> geoiii@kkn.net
> http://www.kkn.net/~k5tr
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

CQ-Contest mailing list

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