[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Public Logs

To: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>,"'Ward Silver'" <hwardsil@gmail.com>,"'CQ-Contest Reflector'" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Public Logs
From: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <nn3w@cox.net>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:00:23 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
To: "'Richard DiDonna NN3W'" <nn3w@cox.net>; "'Ward Silver'" 
<hwardsil@gmail.com>; "'CQ-Contest Reflector'" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 10:43 PM
Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Public Logs

>> > Any contest sponsor who makes complete logs public should be
>> > censured by the entire amateur community.
>> >
>> Excuse me?  Why should contest sponsors have to answer to the
>> whims of one award program?  The ARRL's DXCC program is not the
>> final word when it comes down to record keeping, log posting, QSL
>> sending, and awards management.  Nobody elected the League god
>> and nobody should have to subvert the inegrity of their contest
>> programs just because the League has a stick up its rear
>> end about log times.
> It is completely unnecessary for CQ or any contest sponsor to
> release logs for every Tom, Dick and database compiler.  There
> are plenty of tools if they get off their fat, lazy, old asses
> and make their own analysis of log submissions.

No, actually its not. Folks have called for transparency in the log process 
and to have assurance that what is submitted is open for analysis.  99.5% of 
contesters applaud the CQ Committee's decision to open up the logs.
> The ARRL DXCC program is the oldest and most widely followed
> awards program in amateur radio.  For a bunch of contest sponsors
> to subvert the DXCC program because they do not what is necessary
> to police their own contest is unacceptable.  There is no excuse
> for them to release logs and expect someone else to find and
> prove any alleged cheating.
To subvert assumes that one has given consent to having lived under the 
rubric of the authority in question.  To my knowledge, the CQWW contest 
committee has never agreed to live by the DXCC program's rules - other than 
to use the country list as a basis for multipliers.

There is no subversion.  Indeed, the DXCC rule concerning the publication of 
full QSO information is about a year old. How can there be subversion?  To 
the contrary, its the DXCC program that has created the unrealistic burden.

In any event, releasing logs reaffirms the ability for the contest community 
to self police itself.  Like rulemaking bodies in professional or other 
amateur sports, there is always a need for the competitors themselves to 
police themselves and to acknowledge rulebreakers when they come to the 
attention of the organizers or the competitors themselves.  If you want a 
perfect example of where self policing has failed, look no further than 
professional baseball.

> It's time for contest expert and ARRL New England Director,
> K1KI to call for the DXCC Desk to enforce the rules and call
> on CQ to stop making CQWW participants violate the DXCC Rules.
Oh please.  CQWW has no influence over the ARRL and vice versa.  In fact, 
lets make this easy.  Rather than create undue burdens, the DXCC program 
should go back and do what it used to do - give DXCC credit for verified 
contest QSOs.

73 Rich NN3W

CQ-Contest mailing list

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