[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Congrats to Russian DX Contest cracking down cheating

To: "'CQ Contest'" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Congrats to Russian DX Contest cracking down cheating
From: "Shelby Summerville" <k4ww@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 07:18:51 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Ken Widelitz wrote: "Actually, these new rules make a lot of sense. The 
requirements are
minimally intrusive. Much less so than a referee in the shack."

First, let me say that this is one contest that I've never operated. Second, 
IMHO, the "referee in the shack", should be the operator? If the operator, 
post contest, can't look in the mirror and be convinced that they operated 
totally within the current, published, rules, why bother?
I've never understood why it's necessary to make rules that deter cheating? 
If there was a high monetary value to winning, I might be able to 
understand? The mere thought of the other participants believing that 
cheating was involved, in winning, should be enough to deter cheating, at 
least for me?
Naive, probably...cheater, not a chance

C'Ya, Shelby - K4WW 

CQ-Contest mailing list

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