steve.root@culligan4water.com wrote:
> 3)Loss of DXpedition Activity.The adverse affects of spotting on rare DX
> operations has been reported by at least three operators in recent weeks
> (G3SXW, KM0O, K9NW).All three report the same thing, Packet pileups being so
> unruly that it seriously hinders their ability to operate and enjoy
> the contest.One of the things that makes a contest like CQWW so interesting
> is the rare and exotic DX that shows up.This desirable activity is
> declining as a direct result of “new technology”.
> 4)Broken spots.If you have a run going and someone spots your call
> incorrectly, it’s almost impossible to get the dupes calling you to understand
> that they should be listening to the CW you’re sending and not only reading
> their computer screens.On occasion it is necessary to abandon a good
> run frequency and move just to get away the packet misinformed callers.
Again, I would suggest that these two are the fault not of the spotting
network, but of improper *use* of the network. Blaming it on the network is
like blaming the Bank of America for armed robbery.
Rather than concentrating on ways to limit the spotting network, maybe it would
be a better idea to work on ways to train *users* of the network to
use it more efficiently?
Don't know if this is practical in terms of the technology, but I wonder if
there might be a way to:
- Allow one to request that their call not be spottable. Upon some means of
authentication, G3SXW would be able to request that his DXpedition call
P5/G3SXW not be spottable. Someone entering a spot for that call would get a
message from the node "this operator has requested not to be spotted"
(and the spot would be ignored); spots entering the node from the network would
be ignored and not passed on to other nodes.
- Exact a penalty for *being* a dupe too often. To toss out some (possibly
impractical) numbers, let's define your "dupe rate" as the proportion of
the QSOs you make that come up as duplicates in the other guy's log.
(regardless of whether they come up as duplicates in *your* log - where you may
well have "busted" the call of the guy you duped) Let's say we levy a penalty
of 5% of your score for every % your dupe rate exceeds the contest
average.
- I'm still kinda fond of the idea of an "on-air referee". Referees would be
amateurs not participating in the contest -- for example, someone who
prefers CW might serve as a referee in a phone contest for a few hours. The
referee would monitor for violations of contest rules, government
regulations (like folks trying to run on 14349.7...), and unsportsmanlike
behavior. (like WB9NME calling P5/G3SXW when the P5 just sent "K0A? 5NN
25") Levy a score penalty or complete disqualification for those entrants who
are reported by some minimum number of different referees.
Much of the problem, however, is only going to be solved through user education.
--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View, TN EM66
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|