There is no excuse for deliberately altering the log times. That is
cheating pure and simple. As I read the rules, had the logs been
submitted as is, they would have just been reclassified to M/M without
penalty. The rules are the rules. If you can't live with them then don't
play.
Mike, W1NR
Davor Kucelin wrote:
> Dear Dave and others,
>
> There is probably some misunderstanding. One part is missing on
> radiospot.net.
> On 6400 qsos we had 12qsos under violation of max 2-3min. I checked log my
> self and found those violations. Nobody of you tought that 12 qsos on 6400
> can be human mistakes caused by many factors (sleepnes,hurry,software.)
> Those 12 qsos are not rare mults but also some big M/M stns that can be work
> over the whole contest. If I deleted those qsos it would cause NIL to
> others.
> The right way was claiming Multi-Multi but I assumed those qsos would just
> be flaged and not counted for the score. There are still some logs with this
> errors that passed trough ubn procedure, some even dont have 0/1 for which
> stn did the qso. I agree something has to be done, expecaly in the SOABHP
> cat, lets wait for wwcw results.
>
> What procedure should we do if during a 48h contest we make some mistakes
> In waiting 10min? Do we really have to be M/M or can we just somehow remove
> qsos without hitting others???
>
> 73 Dave 9A1UN
>
> P.S Still love this game
>
>
>
> AB7E wrote:
>
> The responses from those who were DQ'd offer interesting insight into their
> attitudes toward cheating. These folks admit intentionally and blatantly
> violating an important contest rule, thereby attempting to gain an unfair
> advantage over more honest competitors, and yet they feel disqualification
> was
> an "over-reaction". That would be like me robbing a bank and expecting my
> penalty if I got caught to be merely having to return the money. And these
> are
> people from the upper echelon of the sport!
>
> For what it may be worth, one of those same stations clearly and explicitly
> asked me to spot them on the cluster when I worked them in the 2009 CQ WPX
> CW
> contest (yes, I reported it), so I'm not inclined to put much credence into
> sympathetic excuses about isolated errors in judgment.
>
> Dave AB7E
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|