[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM
From: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:40:31 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Of course I did nothing wrong. 

But public opinion does not make it right for CQ Magazine to publish my
personal property without my consent. That IS the issue. It is solely a
principle issue, nothing more nothing less. For those that think I have
a hidden agenda, I feel sorry for you.

I suspect if CQ asked, most would not object to opening their logs, but
they aren't asking, they are forcing it upon people.

The only reason I elected to withhold my log is because I am likely one
of the few that could impact the adjudication process and even that's
questionable, however, the statement is solid. What impact would ten
6Y1V sized logs withheld have on the adjudication process?

For those that worried about people being able to put me us the log
without having worked us, I waited until after the submission deadline
to make my announcement. For those that think we must be cheating, I
will release the logs after the contest results are published.
Basically, every single person that publicly denounced my action holds
no merit. Why? Because they think the issue MUST be something other than
personal freedom.

We have already seen the results of opening logs. Accusations of
cheating, theft of strategy, to name a few. For what? So a few people
can sleep better at night?

Everywhere we turn today, someone is chipping away at our freedom of
choice while most standby idle and do nothing.

When there are no more choices and everything is decided for us, then

David ~ KY1V

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Pete Smith
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:26 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM

Now *that's* over the top!  Slavery?  Give me a break!

I think I read the same public commentary as you did, David, and I
it was almost uniformly opposed to your position.  Since any
topic on this reflector tends to draw the vociferous on both sides, that

suggests to me that the balance of contester opinion is not on your

I'm not suggesting that you did anything wrong, just that you *are*
on this one.

73, Pete N4ZR

At 02:54 PM 2/10/2009, David Kopacz wrote:
>I suggest it is more likely:
>89% didn't take the poll
>6% favor open logs
>3% don't care
>2% opposed
>Even if the poll on contesting.com were an accurate representation of
>the contesting population, one must keep in mind that just because
>something is popular, doesn't make it right (slavery comes to mind
>The results are likely similar to the response I received after
>announcing withholding my logs from CQ Magazine.
>Publicly, a few squeaky wheels shouted loudly against my action, while
>privately via email, more than twice as many applauded my decision to
>take a stand.
>I'll be more than happy to release my logs for inspection to the
>paranoid, the accusers, the naysayers and those that simply think there
>must be "more to the story", once the results are published.
>Mission accomplished.
>David ~ KY1V
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of VE5ZX
>Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 9:32 AM
>To: 'CQ-Contest com'
>Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM
> > Likewise, I continue on philosophical and political grounds to
> > concept of "open logs" as is currently being debated.  That doesn't
>mean I
>The current survey on contesting.com suggests opposition to open logs
>any reason maybe a minority opinion.
>61% favor open logs, 24% don't care and 8% are opposed.
>... Sylvan
>Sylvan Katz, VE5ZX
>Saskatoon, SK
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest mailing list

CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list

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