At 09:09 AM 12/15/2007, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
> > I really wish people would pay closer attention to the second
> > part of my message, where I proposed monitoring of entire bands
> > during contests, using cheap, currently available technology.
>It's an interesting thought but color me a skeptic. I simply
>don't know that two or three receivers per continent would give
>enough coverage to be useful. ...
>In addition to the propagation differences, at 80 KHz per
>receiver is would take at least three receivers per band to
>do the job on phone.
This assumes that the objective is to record every single QSO that takes
place, which would be a little like having constant speed monitoring of
every vehicle on every mile of the interstate. Maybe 90 percent of the
desired impact would be achieved if the cheaters knew the capability
existed, and was being used, but did not know where the monitors were
located for any given contest. Again, the state police and their radars
isn't a bad analogy.
By the way, I strongly endorse the wishlist just posted by KR2Q. The very
best way to cut down on cheating is to tell the sponsors what you know, and
let them follow up. I do believe, though, that part of the deterrent is a
bit more publicity than a line of agate type at the end of a 16-page table
of contest scores. If prestige is what we're all seeking (it certainly
isn't money), then embarrassment is a powerful countermeasure.
73, Pete N4ZR
73, Pete N4ZR
CQ-Contest mailing list