Before anyone starts throwing rocks at Randy, we need to remember he is not
working alone on reviewing logs. There are a number of top ops that are
part of the contest committee. My expectation would be that it would take
more than one person to say "This does not look right..." If the contest
committee - AS A GROUP say a log does not pass muster, that certainly
raises the confidence level by a few more notches over one persons opinion
And - with public logs - anyone who wishes can also look and come to their
own conclusion as to whether a log is believable.
Tom - VE3CX
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com> wrote:
> Quit bellyaching. Download and study Dimitry's log yourself. Draw your own
> conclusions.
>
> http://www.cqww.com/publiclogs/2014cw/to7a.log
>
> Are his rates believable ?
> When he works multipliers not on his run frequency, is it believable
> without assistance ?
> Is his SO2R pileup management believable ?
> How does his log compare with other superb operators, who also operated
> from the Caribbean ? Those logs are also public.
> Consider whether he is exploiting new, but perfectly legal, techniques
> that other's have not yet mastered.
>
> This is exactly why CQWW logs were made public - so that you can see for
> yourself. How about a little crowdsourcing, instead of throwing rocks at
> the CQWW director ? (For those of you still living in the 20th century:
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdsourcing )
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|