[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM

To: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM
From: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:08:10 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

Publishing a log after the contest is NOT a rule, nor is it consensual.
Instead, it is coerced. Either agree to your log being published or
forfeit eligibi8lity for an award. I hardly find that consensual in any
sense of the word.

They do not force us to operate a set period of time. No one is forced
to operate the entire contest. I can operate just 2 hours. They do
specify parameters under which we operate, but they aren't forced
either. They set limits, yet I can operate using 800 watts instead of
the 1500 watt limit. If I choose, I can even categorize myself
differently if I use less power. What a treat! I can send abbreviated
versions of the exchange instead of "spelling them out". I can vary all
sorts of parameters or "rules", yet I am coerced into letting you have
access to my logs if I want an award. Humbug!

Who makes the rules anyway? Is it a panel of our peers? Is it a system
of fair and just measures, or is it one person, or a committee of
carefully chosen individuals that will do as instructed by the supreme

Who cares anyway? We all do this for fun, right? I think that is
certainly the case. Fun as it may be, everyone has a beef with one rule
or another. How many follow the FCC (or own government) rules when
operating? Judging by the crowdedness of the bands, I suggest few...LOL

I'm not trying to bully anyone. I haven't petitioned others to follow my
lead. You seem to have missed my point. My withholding of my log was
merely to show "what can" happen when you start toying with peoples
"personal property". Whether you choose to accept it as reality or not,
my logs ARE my personal property. They are not yours, not CQ Magazines
and certainly not the worlds property.

So perhaps you don't get it. It has nothing to do with whether I like
the "rule" or not. It is solely, and let me repeat this again, solely a
principal issue. I guess some might not be able to think that deep. It's
OK. One day when they wake up and everything is decided for them, they
won't have to think at all, just turn on the TV and down an ice cold
beer (hopefully a Red Stripe while visiting 6Y1V).

I sure have enjoyed this conversation.

If anyone would like to learn what kind of person I really am, join me
at 6Y1V. The rents free, the air's warm and the beer is cold.

David ~ KY1V

-----Original Message-----
From: W0MU Mike Fatchett [mailto:w0mu@w0mu.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:35 PM
To: David Kopacz; cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM

Dave it is just another rule.

They also force us to operate for a set period of time with power
regulations, mode restrictions etc.  They don't ask us to use 599 08
tell us.  What is the difference?

CQ does get your consent.  When you submit your log you consent to them
making the logs public.  That is their rule.  You don't happen to like
for whatever reason you have.

We get it.  You don't like it.  Don't submit your logs.  Move along. 

What gets a bit more interesting is the apparent threat of what happens
9 others do the same....  What happens is simply those operations don't
anything and don't show up in the results and you actually end up
the sport.  Nobody likes bullies.  It would appear you are trying to
the community into your way of thinking.  

This is a competition we don't get to chose which rules to follow.  

Do Nascar drivers get to choose how many laps they have to go around the
track, the fuel they use, tires or horsepower restrictions?  Of course
They make rules all the time that a few drivers or owners do not like
guess what the races go on with them or without them.  

I have not heard one person suggest that you or anyone at 6Y1V did
wrong in the way you operated the contest or even remotely hinted that
or any of the ops down there did any thing wrong.
Nobody has taken away your freedom.  You are free to operate in any
you wish.  To be considered for placement and awards you will have to
your log and abide by the same rules as everyone else.

If you are concerned about your freedoms, there are much bigger fish to
in Washington.


"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you
never get over." Ben Franklin
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of David Kopacz
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:41 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM

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
hidden agenda, I feel sorry for you.

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

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

For those that worried about people being able to put me us the log
having worked us, I waited until after the submission deadline to make
announcement. For those that think we must be cheating, I will release
logs after the contest results are published.
Basically, every single person that publicly denounced my action holds
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
theft of strategy, to name a few. For what? So a few people can sleep
at night?

Everywhere we turn today, someone is chipping away at our freedom of
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*
wrong 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 
>for 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

CQ-Contest mailing list

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