[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Recording your CQ WW CW contest

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Recording your CQ WW CW contest
From: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Reply-to: vo1he@rac.ca
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:59:20 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
So I guess the next generation of $12,000.00 rigs will have built-in
audio/visual recording capabilities.

73 -- Paul VO1HE  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Scott Robbins
> Sent: December 14, 2007 14:14
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Recording your CQ WW CW contest
> K1TTT:
> >Mid June sometimes I turn on 6m and find a contest going on, 
> so I pass 
> >out a few points.  Then it starts to rain and I stay on and 
> play some 
> >on 2m and 70cm.  I send a log in and get a certificate.  I 
> didn't mean 
> >to, but I accidentally became a 'serious' entrant.  Should I 
> be denied 
> >a certificate because I didn't record the whole contest?
> Perhaps.  Just like you have to log, you have to record if 
> you expect to win. 
> It is not at all unreasonable.  What we're talking about here 
> is a mindset shift, not unlike when the contest community 
> switched from paper logging to computer based logging.  The 
> next logical step in the digital age is recording.
> W4TV:
> >So what?  WRTC is a limited event with a limited number of competing 
> >stations.  To require everyone who HOPES he might have a 
> chance to win 
> >to record all 48 hours or to DENY anyone who might be lucky 
> enough to 
> >surpass his own expectations and actually WIN the "title" because he 
> >didn't record all
> >48 hours (or heaven forbid, had a recording failure) is asinine.
> I would venture at the top end of SOABHP radio contesting, 
> that you are discussing a limited event with a limited number 
> of stations as well.  There are not 100 people vying for the 
> top 10 in any category of any major contest. 
> There are surely *100 entrants*, and I would say 95% or 98% 
> of all of them have no reason to record themselves operating 
> the contest.  
> Recording should be right up there with logging.  If you 
> didn't log it, you didn't work it.  If you didn't record it, 
> you didn't work it.  Very simple. 
> >Contest sponsors and log checkers can properly review the 
> logs of the 
> >top stations without either recordings or making the logs 
> public.  If 
> >they can't they might as well cancel the whole contest because they 
> >don't have any business sponsoring the event.
> That is apparently incorrect on its face.  Because if contest 
> sponsors and log checkers COULD properly review the logs 
> without recordings and determine who is legit and who is not, 
> we wouldn't be having this discussion about cheating, would we?  
> W0MU:
> >So now I have to record an entire contest somehow and if by 
> chance my 
> >hard drive crashes on the way back to the USA my score does 
> not count....
> That is correct.  Just like if you have no log, with no 
> recording you have no entry.  Logs are backed up to floppies 
> or by other means when operating the contest, recordings can 
> be as well.
> >This is 21st century....  What tape you are talking about. 
> Get yourself 
> >cheap MP3 player with line input and 1-2Gig of memory and you can 
> >easily record 48 hours 2 radio and get file transferred to 
> you home PC 
> >for later use.
> Like I said ... SIMPLE.
> Scott Robbins, W4PA
> W4PA Contest Blog - http://w4pa.journalspace.com What Is 
> Radio Contesting? - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contesting
> ______________________________________________________________
> ______________________
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
> _______________________________________________
> 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>