> Waiting for sponsors seems to be like the dragging-of-feet by the Major
> Baseball League officials with the 'performance enhancing substances'
I want to be sure to point out that I think the sponsors of the major
contests do, with few exceptions, a very fine job of administering and
adjudicating those contest programs. They do so with a paucity of resources
and with the lightly- or non-compensated labor of many volunteers and
"friends of contesting." There have been some comments made that this is
somehow all the sponsors fault that cheaters aren't caught and keelhauled.
Well, it's not that easy.
They already do an amazingly good job. CQ WW is the gold standard for
accuracy enforcement as far as I'm concerned and it's a 100% volunteer
organization. The brain power that gets applied to going through our logs
would be worth millions on the open market. None of the sponsors is
slacking nor is there a big bucket full of spare resources laying around to
apply to these issues. To suggest otherwise is to vastly underestimate the
challenge of detecting WITH HIGH CONFIDENCE the kind of behavior that
spawned this thread. It sounds easy - until you try it. And then multiply
it by thousands of logs and circumstances.
So, if there is are some things that can be done within our community's
rather limited resources, fine...but this isn't the Federal Gummit. We can
only go so far. So my suggestion is to not be looking to the sponsors or
the spotting network operators for solutions when the Finger of Opportunity
is really pointing at us, the contesters. (No, not *that* finger - the
other one. Right.)
73, Ward N0AX
CQ-Contest mailing list