[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Dear Santa retrospective

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Dear Santa retrospective
From: kr2q@optonline.net
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 12:55:53 +0000 (GMT)
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Usual disclaimer:  This work is my own, based on my own opinion and should not 
construed or hinted-at as anything based on my role within, or indicative of, 
contest organization with which I may be associated.

Maybe there is something special about this time year.  The Santa wish-list 
close to my own.  Just for fun, I went back through my own archives.

FROM 1997 (10 years ago!)

I believe that every contester has a duty to report violations of the rules.  
If you know someone is using packet and they enter as SO, then it should be 
everyone's ethical responsibility to make such infractions known to the contest 
sponsors.  If you don't report it, you are helping to foster an atmosphere that 
cheating is acceptable, even the norm!  At a bare minimum, YOU should notify 
the cheater that what they are doing is WRONG.

The first line of defense for contest violations is the contest community!

If YOU know of cheating, what have you done about it?  Have you reported it to 
any contest sponsor?  Have you discussed it with any contest club?  Have you 
even expressed your thoughts to the accused?  Maybe you have just accepted it?

3.  And from this year:
There are plenty of cases where the "cheaters" (and I hate to use that term) 
been discovered and appropriate action taken.  I won't identify them, but each 
free to identify them self, if so inclined.  And some of them were/are "big gun 
types too.  

Is it possible to "cheat" by use of external spotting and not get caught?  Of 
Is it possible to run higher power than allowed and not get caught?  Of course. 
Does inability to catch everybody all the time mean that we should abandon 
rules and logical entry categories...NO WAY!

Sometimes sponsors "know" who is cheating (volunteers are typically great 
but may lack adequate proof.  Just because the ethics of some entrants may be 
than stellar does not mean that the sponsors should follow suit.

Some guys "ruin it" for others by violating whatever it is that the mainstays 
hold dear.  
This is something that YOU can and should help to address.

[end of excerpts]

So......see any common threads here?  I have been STUNNED lately by how much
"knowledge of cheating" there is out there, yet as far as I know, there is 
very, very little
feedback to the contest sponsors.   

As per the common theme, over the last ten years, JUST TELL THE CONTEST 
It does little (no) good to sit on your information and then shake your head in 
when "your favorite cheater" is "missed" by the contest sponsor.  We are all in 
this together.

ONE MORE NOTE:  I think we have to be very careful about PERMANENT DQ.  For 
those of
us with long memories, it is pretty easy to recall SUPER FAMOUS callsigns that 
have been
DQ'ed in the past, but now are globally recognized as WORLD CLASS OPERATORS.  
recent postings where the "good guys" are listed, include at least one of those 
now famous
SUPER OP's who was DQ'ed.  We even have TRUTH SAYERS urging us to stay on the 
straight and narrow who have a well-known (but now past) history of cheating.  
People can
turn around.  Having said that, I would be a strong proponent of TWO DQs = 
life-time ban.

Wishing all you a happy and healthy New Year and a sincere wish that in 10 more 
years, we
won't still be writing the same stuff.  May all (or most) of your wishes come 

de Doug KR2Q
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] Dear Santa retrospective, kr2q <=