[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM

To: CQ-Contest com <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM
From: John Brosnahan -- W0UN <shr@swtexas.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 10:15:51 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
At 09-02-09 09:10, Michael Coslo wrote:

>While logs and police issues might be an interesting if flawed
>analogy, I just gotta say it.....
>Guys and gals, we really should ease up the paranoia business. If a
>log submitted near the deadline date deserves suspicion, extra
>checking because we think that people who submit their logs near the
>deadline are cheating, then we're starting down a path that ends up
>with demanding live internet logging during the contest, no
>exceptions. No connection? Tough - find something else to do that
>If extra scrutiny is warranted, then why? Is there a shown correlation
>between submission date and cheating? Where is it, I'd love to see the
>And of course, the thing that proves the actual silliness of the
>"people who submit near the deadline are cheating" hypothesis is that
>if that were the actual case, you can bet that anyone who is actually
>cheating is going to send in their logs early.
>If you send in your log right after the contest, that is great. If
>not, then any time up to the deadline is also fine.
>That there are advantages for the checkers is true - although not
>huge, the wish for early log submission is more one of temperament on
>the part of the person who gets to check the logs. As I noted in my
>original reply to Tree when he started the original topic, my wife has
>a similar outlook - she considers a half hour early to be a half hour
>late. We have truly showed up at places an hour early. I used to be
>that way myself, but over time, I found that it is not possible to
>change human nature.
>But seriously, to assume that people who submit their logs later in
>the process are likely to be cheating,  and should be treated that
>way, is disingenuous at best. It is certainly insulting to the decent
>honest Ops who haven't done a thing wrong, yet are accused as likely
>cheaters, just by their submission date that is within contest
>-73 de Mike N3LI -

BTW  I agree 100% with Mike.

As a teenager I found it challenging to calculate the exact departure 
time and route in order to drive to my destination and arrive at 
PRECISELY the appointed minute -- it was a game I liked to 
play.  Later in life I became less anal about timing (but not about 
other things) to the point where I have virtually always filed IRS 
tax extensions for filing late, etc.  Just the way I am.

I would put off things that I needed to do in order to make time for 
a contest and then after the contest I would try to go back and play 
catch-up on the things I was supposed to have been doing.  The log 
deadline would then loom and I would frantically try to get the 
paperwork (and now computer work) done in time to make the 
deadline.  It had nothing to do with cheating, only my own 
procrastination and inability to manage my time better.  Probably a 
good measure of ADHD but not of contest ethics.

But one thing I have not seen mentioned (I have not followed this 
closely since it is all borderline paranoia -- so my apologies if 
this has already been mentioned) is that some feel that revealing 
their score early on (say on 3830) gives OTHERS the chance to see 
your score and gives THEM the knowledge needed and a chance to cheat 
in a close race.  They will know just how much (little) that they 
have to do to tweak their score when it is very close.  So there is 
certainly a belief by a few that it is imperative to wait until the 
last minute before the deadline before revealing your score in order 
to eliminate the opportunity for SOMEONE ELSE to cheat. So it is a 
measure of SECURITY to not reveal your score on 3830, or to send in 
your log early lest the reviewers accidently let your numbers be 
known to the competition.

I am not saying I agree with this  -- just that it is a consideration 
for some, and worth considering in any debate.

--John  W0UN

CQ-Contest mailing list

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