CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A debacle

To: cq-contest@contesting.com, donovanf@starpower.net
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A debacle
From: Richard F DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 19:17:12 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Frank, I looked at this with some spot checks: OE3V, LA5HE (Rag!), SP3CQP, etc. Your team did not work any of these stations; nor did K3LR; nor did DL1A; nor did CN2AA - on any band...

Looking a the log of ON4TO, the op made his last QSO at 2310z on 11/29 and it looks like he went to bed. He resumed operating at 0608z on 11/30.

Odd indeed.

73 Rich NN3W

On 5/10/2015 5:14 PM, donovanf@starpower.net wrote:
Juan,


You've discovered an extremely unusual pattern in the TO7A public log
that's very difficult to rationalize.


Three of the 160 meter European QSOs in TO7A's log have public logs:
ON4TO, UT5URW and R6KY. There is no TO7A 160M QSO in
any of these logs.


There's a remarkable run of 160 meter European QSOs from 0437-0608Z
Sunday in the TO7A's log but a lack of any of the very active 160 meter
European calls in the TO7A log.. It would be interesting to try to find the
European calls in the 0437-0608Z TO7A 160 meter log and also the
PY1NP and LU2YE calls in the 160 meters in the logs of other very active
160 meter stations such as CN2AA, 9K2HN, HK1NA and PJ2T.


I suspect only a tiny fraction of the European calls in that 0437-0608Z 160
meter run appear in any 160 meter log and PY1NP and LU2YE
probably won't be found either.


This unusual pattern may also appear elsewhere in the TO7A log...


73
Frank
W3LPL

----- Original Message -----

From: "Juan EA5RS" <ea5rs@ono.com>
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2015 6:08:57 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A debacle

Interesting debate, but I am afraid there has been some misleading
info/assumption on the reason for TO7A's DQ.

I have not studied the log in detail, but if you are curious enough, have a
look at TO7A's 160m log:
Not one single station with a public log in zones 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20 or
33 claims working TO7A on 160
Yet TO7A's log claims having worked 29 stations in these zones.
Most of these 29 QSOs are unique calls at least on 160, most do not have a
public log, and if they have a public log, the 160m QSO with TO7A is not
there

Maybe this has something to do with why he has been DQd
I have performed a similar scrutiny with some of TO7A's competitors logs but
I haven't found a similar situation

Just public logs data (5,8 million records) and some database code

Juan
EA5RS

-----Mensaje original-----
De: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] En nombre de Stan
Stockton
Enviado el: domingo, 10 de mayo de 2015 1:09
Para: W0MU Mike Fatchett
CC: cq-contest@contesting.com
Asunto: Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A debacle

On 5/9/2015 12:11 PM, Lloyd Cabral wrote:


After following this thread, my only wish is that Randy would have
inquired here for another e-mail address
for Dim, or another source of contact with him BEFORE bringing this issue
mainstream. Accusations as
serious as this should first be handled privately with the accused given a
fair chance to defend himself.
Stan K5GO hit the nail on the head with his previous post. IMHO, taking
Dim's case public right off seemed
premature, unprofessional and totally unnecessary.
Lloyd KH6LC
On May 9, 2015, at 3:15 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:

The guy got caught red handed and you people want to hang those that
caught him.

Mike,

I wish you had told everyone you had information showing or even saying he
got caught red handed a long time ago. Do you have some information that
says he was caught "red handed"?

Everyone else is reading what has been written and the email posted on the
reflector says that the committee had a "belief" that he was using
assistance and substantiated the fact that it was a "belief" by asking him
to provide a recording (not required in the rules) in order to further
evaluate the situation. However, even in that email, the bottom line and
last sentence, after what would appear to be an attempt to communicate some
hope that there would be further evaluation, said emphatically and in no
uncertain terms that he was disqualified for 2014 but welcome to enter in
2015.

I am not making any assumption this process is as cut and dried as you would
like it to be.

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

_______________________________________________
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

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