Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Packet\s+Cheerleaders\s*$/: 38 ]

Total 38 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 06:53:38 -0800
It should be obvious to most now that packet presents serious challenges to fair play in radiosport. Not only is the use of packet spots by an operator who claims to be unassisted a problem, but the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00150.html (10,039 bytes)

2. [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Hrvoje Horvat" <hrle@ipazin.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 17:28:00 +0100
Like somebody mentioned before using a DX cluster and claiming unassisted is nothing compared to cheating on other stuff - excessive power and so on. I hope that somewhere in the near future we will
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00162.html (9,912 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mb.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:17:30 -0600
I don't doubt that being spotted helps rates. I wonder the extent to which spots reach saturation, however. This raises an interesting question: by what mechanism do we make operators responsible for
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00172.html (12,869 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 19:13:15 -0800
Easy solution. TURN IT OFF!!!! Tom W7WHY _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00173.html (8,852 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: VR2BrettGraham <vr2bg@harts.org.hk>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:40:39 +0000
9A6XX added: Like somebody mentioned before using a DX cluster and claiming unassisted is nothing compared to cheating on other stuff - excessive power and so on. A few more dB just on the transmit s
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00176.html (10,600 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: Craig Cook <n7or@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 07:24:56 -0800 (PST)
If you could turn it off, which you can't, you would drive even more casual ops away from your contests. Haven't you done enough of that? http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest _____
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00178.html (9,737 bytes)

7. RE: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 08:58:07 -0700
It would be interesting to correlate the spots with actually contest-pedition logs to see if indeed there was a spike in the rate. I have no issues with cheerleading as long as it is not done by thos
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00179.html (14,081 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: mike dl dormann <w7dra@juno.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 09:01:36 -0500
QSLs to only those who entered a log in the contest? ban casual ops? AWA does just that mike w7dra who is telling EVERYONE he will be ZK1DRA in CQWW and ARRL160 spot me! spot me! spot me! ___________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00180.html (9,241 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 19:28:24 -0000
I'm looking for contest logging software (before CQWW CW) that will - 1. Self-spot every time I press F1. 2. Spot the other station every time I log a QSO. We have the technology - let's put it to go
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00181.html (9,618 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:41:30 -0800
I believe it happens _a lot_ in the larger contest clubs. Check out this example from 2002: http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-03/msg00080.html This happened more-or-less spon
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00182.html (10,442 bytes)

11. RE: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: corneliuspaul@gmx.net
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 22:07:01 +0100
At 16:58 09.11.2004, Mike Fatchett wrote: It would be interesting to correlate the spots with actually contest-pedition logs to see if indeed there was a spike in the rate. Everybody who went on a DX
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00183.html (9,402 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: KI9A@aol.com
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 17:30:42 EST
There is one major flaw Ken, at what point will be "allowed" to spot someone? Once? Twice? Once per band? How about the ARRL 10 contest, once per mode? 5 times? What? What if I signed on with a fake
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00187.html (10,728 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: kd4d@comcast.net
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 22:58:14 +0000
Hi Ken: Is there a SINGLE contest with a rule against "Cheerleading" spots? I can't think of one offhand. Also, a lot of the spotting may be being done by casual participants who don't care much abou
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00188.html (12,272 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 15:41:39 -0800
There is none at present. This is a relatively new phenomenon on the packet cluster network. It's only been two or three years since I first noticed it, and ZF2MM in early 2002 was the first to reall
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00189.html (13,532 bytes)

15. RE: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "David Robbins K1TTT" <k1ttt@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:11:44 -0000
I hate to post a public reply to a private message, but I started rambling (is it age that causes this to happen???) and this just got too good to keep between the two of us... To really understand t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00190.html (14,788 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mb.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 23:21:22 -0600
I get such a kick out of the complete absurdity of this sentiment. Yes, it's admirable to want to be a 'pure' amateur radio operator. I support wholeheartedly this person's desire to go back to basi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00194.html (11,912 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: kd4d@comcast.net
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:30:14 +0000
Good day, all: I thought this was a key point! I don't want to see the contest organizers do ANYTHING to discourage casual operators. After we work the serious guys in the first few hours, what would
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00199.html (10,390 bytes)

18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: "Bob Naumann - N5NJ" <n5nj@gte.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:36:49 -0600
I have to respectfully disagree that this is a foolish topic. Contest ethics, due to the "honor system" that is part of the contest landscape, may instead be the most important topic we could discuss
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00200.html (11,557 bytes)

19. RE: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: Jim Reisert AD1C <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:58:54 -0500
At 04:07 PM 11/9/2004, corneliuspaul@gmx.net wrote: Everybody who went on a DXpedition can tell you that you will almost always notice you have been spotted. either it turns your nice and steady pile
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00201.html (9,801 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet Cheerleaders (score: 1)
Author: Jan Erik Holm <sm2ekm@telia.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 15:17:08 +0100
Problem is, when is it random and when is it not random. 73 SM2EKM -- Bob Naumann - N5NJ wrote: Random acts of kindness .i.e; spotting someone else on your own, without being asked to do so, whether
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00208.html (9,797 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu