[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW CW & 6Y1V Logs

To: cq-contest@contesting.com, Albert Crespo <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW CW & 6Y1V Logs
From: Julius Fazekas <phriendly1@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: phriendly1@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 04:52:45 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
This is an interesting perspective...

Stop giving people ideas ;o)


Julius Fazekas

Tennessee Contest Group
TnQP http://www.tnqp.org/

Elecraft K2/100 #4455
Elecraft K3/100 #366

--- On Fri, 1/30/09, Albert Crespo <f5vhj@orange.fr> wrote:

> From: Albert Crespo <f5vhj@orange.fr>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW CW & 6Y1V Logs
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Date: Friday, January 30, 2009, 7:06 AM
> It would not be surprised if 6Y1V contacts start to show up
> in logs in
> greater frequency then in the past. Since there will be no
> way to verify
> 6Y1V QSOs, this multiplier is ripe to be added to those who
> have "creative"
> logs.
> Many contacts get logged that are questionable because of
> QRM, QRN, or
> whatever that are later labeled NIL. That is nothing new. 
> In the old days before electronic logs, these questionable
> contacts just got
> counted in most cases because of the sheer enormity of
> verification for
> every contact. Now they can be weeded out through the
> useage of electronic
> logs.
> If everyone followed the stand of 6Y1V, then we would go
> back to old days of
> paper logging when verifying contacts was very hit and
> miss. It would damage
> the whole system of trying to make sure that accuracy
> counts.
> I doubt many will want to go back to this old system which
> was subject to
> abuse and arbitrary evaluation of logs.
> If you do not want to play the game by the rules, try to
> change the rules.
> If you cannot do so, then you don't play  the game.
> As for public logs, when I bother to check why I am not in
> somebody's log
> that I have received a NIL , it is helpful to me to find
> out if someone was
> so off base in copying my call that I am not in it, or that
> that person
> never actually heard the QSO and the fault was at my end.
> ----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> W0MU Mike Fatchett
> Sent: 30 January 2009 04:27
> To: 'David Kopacz'; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW CW & 6Y1V Logs
> So does this mean that 6Y1V will be DQed as the rules read
> that electric
> logs are required for high scoring entrants or did 6Y1V
> just not submit
> anything to CQ?
> If there is nothing to hide and you stand behind your score
> then what do you
> have to worry about?
> I can see why some would not want other to see their logs
> as it potentially
> could expose a strategy that others may not be on to aside
> from any
> nefarious activities.
> I guess if you are not intending to follow the rules then
> don't operate or
> don't submit your logs for consideration of winning an
> award. 
> Mike W0MU
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> David Kopacz
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 4:54 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW CW & 6Y1V Logs
> 6Y1V did not submit its log to CQ Magazine for the CQWW CW
> contest in 2008.
> I personally thank my guest operators Kelly VE4XT and Gary
> W5ZL for granting
> me the flexibility to make this decision. I want to stress
> that my opinions
> below are my own, not theirs. They neither condoned nor
> condemn my action;
> they simply agreed to provide me the latitude to make the
> decision without
> prejudice. For this alone, they are to be commended. In
> addition, they are
> both fine gentlemen and fantastic operators.
> I am not in agreement with the CQWW committee's
> decision to publish logs
> without the implicit consent of the log owner simply to
> quell a fear of
> cheating, real or perceived. Note that I do think quell is
> a highly
> appropriate term here. If cheating is suspected, it should
> be dealt with
> privately and quietly between the committee and the
> accused. If outside
> assistance is needed to review logs, it should be solicited
> privately by the
> committee. If someone is found to be cheating, then making
> that knowledge
> public should be done at the discretion of the committee,
> but based upon
> firm rules applied equally to all.
> While I understand the new policy's intent, the results
> may be akin to a
> public flogging in a town square. It's likely that
> eventually someone will
> be accused of cheating when they are truly not guilty. The
> accusation will
> most likely come from someone other than the contest
> committee. Imagine if
> the contest committee doesn't make the painstaking
> effort necessary to
> thoroughly review the  log of the accused in order to
> publicly exonerate
> him/her.
> The perception of being accused alone will leave lasting
> scars for the
> innocent contester as most competitors will not
> independently research the
> facts themselves in order to exonerate the accused; thereby
> leaving the
> impression the accuser is correct.
> Our society has moved beyond this method of social
> restraint, so why is
> amateur radio contesting moving in the opposite direction?
> In my opinion, in a hobby where the stakes are so low,
> there is no monetary
> reward and most of us do this just for fun, the idea of
> forcing people to
> open their personal logs for worldwide inspection is not
> only ludicrous but
> it is downright shameful. The contest committees might as
> well just be
> saying "We don't trust our fellow amateurs".
> For a hobby founded on
> International brotherhood and goodwill, this is a very sad
> time.
> Since I did not have an opportunity to express my opinion
> during the
> decision making process, my only recourse is to publicly
> object and not turn
> in my logs. Some have suggested I shouldn't participate
> at all. Why should I
> stop having fun just to make my point? Besides, if a few
> dozen participants
> with large logs stop sending them, it just may have a
> significant impact
> upon the log checking process and eventually the committee
> may see that not
> only is this decision unpopular but it has consequences as
> well.
> While opening my log to anyone that asks is really no big
> deal, having the
> right to decide to whom and when I open it is a big deal. I
> choose to open
> my logs to the contest committee, but I choose not to open
> them to the
> world. In addition, I choose not to enable a system that
> assumes guilt
> before innocence.
> David ~ KY1V
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> 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>