I agree. Good message.
My question to the CQ folks is was this same message delivered to this
entrant prior to the entrant writing CQ-Contest? If not, why not and
will this policy change in the future?
I also agree 100 percent with W0YK's suggestions of handling things like
we would at a big party not a military boot camp.
W0MU
On 2/4/2018 9:42 PM, Kelly Taylor wrote:
Doug’s message is great.
I think if anything, the lesson here is the value of transparency. Announcing
DQs (or administrative check logs) but trying to keep the reasons private just
raises suspicion.
Suggesting, as CQ did, the only reason for the reclassification was the failure to provide a recording — and not how
suspicious log entries could not be corroborated with SDR evidence — means the scolding at the end of Doug’s
message is a bit misplaced. Surely we all have enough life experience our BS detectors go off full steam ahead when someone,
anyone, suggests “just trust us…” The fact other committee members have, at times, been a bit condescending
when similar issues were raised certainly didn’t help.
But I give Doug credit for a good explanation all the same. This wouldn’t have
blown up like this had the committee got out in front of it instead.
73, kelly, ve4xt,
On Feb 4, 2018, at 4:22 PM, Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Doug,
Kudos for transparency. A little bit goes a long way. Seems a lot of
us were unaware of the actual reason for recording. Seems like the
recording is a 2nd chance for the operator to redeem themselves, after
SDR recordings come up empty. This to me is a very reasonable
position.
73
Ria, N2RJ
On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 6:27 AM, DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL <kr2q@optimum.net> wrote:
It is not the practice of the CQWW Contest Committee to respond publicly to
comments about individual entries.
After discussion within the committee, the following short memo was deemed
appropriate.
1. As with all requests for an audio file, this log contained a number
of unusual events and QSOs.
2. Using our globally placed SDR network (which copied MM3AWD perfectly
well) we did not hear
those QSOs take place, so he was asked for a recording.
3. A recording was not provided, so the Contest Committee took the action of
exercising Rule XII (C),
which states: "If no recording is made available, the Committee may
reclassify to an appropriate category,
reclassify to Administrative Check Log, or disqualify the entry."
http://cqww.com/rules.htm
4. Of the three options available, Administrative Check Log was deemed
the most appropriate.
We don't ask everybody in the "top 5" for a recording. We need something
suspicious or curious.
Please see the July 23, 2017 BLOG, item #4:
http://cqww.com/blog/2017-cqww-rules-update-announcement/
Here is an excerpt from the blog:
[Editorial comment: It is important to note a few things about the
“recording” rule. First, 2016 was not the
first year for this rule. Second, the committee does not and will not
request a recording simply because
an entrant is in the top 5. The committee will request a recording when
something suspicious or curious
in the log is identified by the committee. This can be a statistical flag
or something identified after human
review. The committee does not request a recording in an attempt to “go
fishing” for something “out of the blue”
or “without reason.” If you are not breaking the rules or trying to stretch
the rules beyond the letter and/or
spirit of the rules, you are probably not going to be asked for a
recording.]
It would be helpful to any discussion on CQ-Contest if the commenters would
be familiar with the CQWW
Rules before jumping to and posting irrational conclusions.
Doug, KR2Q
on behalf of the CQWW Contest Committee
_______________________________________________
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
|