Hi Stan,
What? Is this aspect of Radio going to work out like 11 Meters? CB? You
can enforce the rules, so if there are people breaking the rules,
instead of enforcing the rules, and find and punish the rule breakers,,
we change the rules so that the rule breakers are no longer breaking the
law?
I say NO WAY!!!
As one that never has used a spotting system during a contest, I'd
rather have the group, when they have absolute proof of a cheater, they
are banned for life from ever entering again. Period.
do not bend TO THE RULE BREAKERS, punish them.
Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 3/17/2013 12:18 AM, Stan Stockton wrote:
I realize only a very small percentage of contesters read the traffic on this
reflector but it is one avenue to discuss contest related issues whether it be
comfortable chairs or the future of contesting. The Internet is great!
As those of you who read everything on this reflector know, a survey is being
conducted to see what the response will be (from those who respond) regarding
whether the single operator category should be eliminated completely in favor
of one category (assisted) that is already in place for ones who want to use
assistance to find the DX to work.
I see another survey on the contesting.com website that asks whether there should be an
open discussion as to whether to "merge" the two categories in light of the
fact that it is difficult and expensive to catch the cheaters. I am at a loss as to how
to answer that question. Certainly want it to be discussed if the alternative is to
eliminate Single Operator category without discussion. Don't want it discussed if
wanting it to be discussed means I am in favor of the proposed change.
1. However hard to imagine, the thought of eliminating the standard single
operator category in which 2/3 of entrants choose to enter is seriously being
considered and seemingly everyone's opinion will be counted regardless of how
much thought you give it.
There are two reasons I can think of why 2/3 would choose to not use
"assistance":
A. They want to compete in a category where they have developed skills
to find and copy the stations they work without having remote receivers all
over the world do it for them, and they want to compete with others who want to
do the same. Seems like a valid reason for some to not choose assisted. It is
fun to find and work DX. Many have forgotten how fun that activity can be.
B. They do not have access to the Internet at their station.
I suspect most are in A above.
2. Elimination of Single Operator category would result in cutting the awards
and recognition for outstanding efforts by 50% unless replaced with yet another
category over which adjudication would be difficult - similar to low power,
high power, QRP, Tribanders and wires, etc.
3. There will be an impact on expeditions where serious operators can currently
choose a category and compete for winning without having to secure reliable
Internet service. Since it would not possible to win without the RBN giving
you a list of every station in the world calling CQ, those who are serious and
either do not want to compete on that basis or who cannot secure Internet
service will perhaps choose to not go on that expedition. More expeditions -
I doubt. Fewer expeditions - probably.
The only reason I have heard for this to even be discussed is that the contest
sponsors spend a lot of time and expense trying to verify whether someone might
be cheating.
If 2/3 choose to enter a category, knowing full well that in that category
along with all other categories a possibility exists for someone to cheat and
get away with it, is there good reason to even discuss eliminating that most
popular category?
I would rather not see anyone's rights or freedoms be taken away if exercising
those rights does not adversely impact others.
Saying you still have the option to not use assistance is fine for those who
want to play for a few hours of fun but not for those who are serious
competitors.
Most contesters worldwide who did not submit an entry under their call sign in
the last contest with their email included are unaware this discussion is
taking place. Many avid contesters in the USA are unaware because they were
part of a multi-operator group or don't subscribe to this reflector and read it
carefully. This is one matter where an opinion may actually count.
I think the real question is whether there is real and serious detriment to the
"minority" who already have a category allowing them to use assistance because
those in the vast majority who don't choose to use it are allowed to compete with others
who feel the same way?
I urge everyone to take the various surveys regardless of your opinions but
consider the question in the paragraph above before forming an opinion. When I
looked earlier there were fewer than 20 responses to the survey on
contesting.com.
Let's take this subject up in a few years if the percentages "naturally"
reverse and the number of Single Operator entries are only 1/3 - same as current level of
Single Operator Assisted. Sound fair?
73...Stan, K5GO
_______________________________________________
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
|