CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting

To: jpescatore@aol.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
From: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 07:01:52 -0700
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Spot all S&P will not be enabled by default. Many users do not have the
skills to use it correctly.

73,
Steve, N2IC

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 6:49 AM K3TN via CQ-Contest <
cq-contest@contesting.com> wrote:

> Self spotting obviously did not ruin the ARRL SSB, and it is definitely
> one now legal way to increase score. But, it just doesn't feel right. Below
> is what I sent to Bob W5OV in the ARRL contest forum and directly to the
> CAC.
> Context: Bud AA3B both independently put in similar but slightly different
> feature requests to the N1MM Logger+ team to support comment field labeling
> of self spots. Bud's implemented - you can now include text in your self
> spot, Bud suggested "QRV" and a few were doing that. Bud's goal was to make
> finding self spots more easily. The version pushed out before the ARRL DX
> SSB includes Bud's suggestion.
> Mine was rejected - I wanted a default value put in the text field so I
> could choose to filter out self-spots. Right now the AR cluster syntax
> doesn't support doing so. That would hurt me more than it would hurt any
> self spotter, but, like not using history files, it is what I'd like to do.
> I'm going to check to see if there has been a feature request turn Spot
> All S&P Qs by default, which I think is a much better solution.
> 73 John K3TN
>
> Hi, Bob - I feel like self spotting goes against the values we've had in
> contesting and contesting rules for many years.
>
> In the past there have been little things, like MultiMulti ops not being
> allowed to go home and work the MM from home. That was never going to swing
> the results but it represented a value that QSOs should be made the right
> way, kinda like fishing in a barrel is not an acceptable norm in fishing.
>
> I sent in comments that I was against it in HF non-SSB contests where we
> already have skimmers doing a fine job of spotting stations large and
> small. I'm not a big VHF contester so don't think my opinion shouldn't
> count there  - but I feel the same way there! Contesting and skeds to me
> should not go together, nor should self-spotting.
>
> The rules changed, so be it. I'd like a way in CW and RTTY contest for me
> to not participate. I doubt that is a meaningful punishment to anyone but
> me, and it let's me maintain my values. The other way would be for me to
> only look at skimmer spots, which would punish me a bit more!
>
> I would have much, much, much rather see the CAC and members talk with the
> contesting community to think of ways rules could be changed to encourage
> more spotting in SSB contests - that is the real issue that was trying to
> be addressed, since there is no shortage of spots in CW and RTTY tests.
>
> A feature request to N1MM to make the "Spot every S&P QSO" the default
> would have been a simple step. The ARRL using RBN stats after the contest
> to have "Top 10 Human Spotter" listings in the results, maybe even offer
> $20 coffee cups to the top spotters, etc. Many other ways to get more spots
> in SSB tests.
>
> I've been a fan of leaping on most technology changes that have caused
> controversy, like FT8 and remote operating. But to me this (and history
> files that I choose not to use) are like post contest log manipulation. A
> norm that I'd like to see N1MM Logger+ enable choice in, just the way
> Logger+ was changed years ago to make post-contest log manipulation harder
> (not impossible!).
>
> 73 John K3TN
> _______________________________________________
> 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>