[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Cheating with Packet

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Cheating with Packet
From: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>
Reply-to: Tom Rauch <w8ji@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 01:57:35 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> The problem isn't that people use spots, it's that some, a 
> minority perhaps,
> use them and don't claim to use them.

....and that minority makes what? A few multipliers more and 
virtually no more QSO's. Big deal. It isn't worth doing that 
any more than it is worth working someone on 7125 or 7127 
LSB, or going down in the SSB band and saying "listen up for 
me", or making a sked. Plenty of people do lots of other 
things too, and it still doesn't help them significantly.

It's truly amazing what flies out of some giant pie-holes. 
Some people fancy themselves amateur radio's equivalent of 
Clint Eastwood, who's sole reason for lack of modern success 
is their lack of money to buy hardware.

Others claim the reason they get totally hosed is because 
someone else used packet.

It seems some can't ever lose anything just because someone 
else is better than they are at operating, has more 
technical skill, a better station, or has a better 
combination of the three. It always has to be something 
negative about the rest of the world.

If you can't be a winner, be a whiner. There must be an 
external reason whiners are 200 QSO's and 10 multipliers 

Now here's something to think about. If we can't stop or 
disqualify a station who goes out of the band to work 
people, something we can all hear and would appear in a log 
as a QSO, why do we think we can do anything about anything 
less easily proven? Everyone, contesters or not, knows when 
someone is on 3600 or 3602 LSB, 7125 or 7127 LSB, or on 
14348 or 14350 USB. If we can't control the obviously proven 
that makes us all look like fools, why spend so much energy 
worrying about something that means virtually nothing?

I say, give 'em a big packet of cheese to go with all that 

73 Tom 

CQ-Contest mailing list

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