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.
This is a reasonable response. I wonder if it would be more effective if it sounded more like the WW CC were hosting a party rather than enforcing rules at a military academy. Thoughtfully position
Hi, The rules give a false impression. They say 'MUST record' ... Which you now say will only be required when something suspicious or curious in the log is identified by the committee. You have now
Nicely stated, Doug. I think most of us knew that the committee asked for a recording because something was suspicious but it is nice to hear an official CQWW response. John KK9A It is not the practi
Thanks for your reaction Doug. Your final remark is particularly true. 73, Maarten PD2R _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.
Thanks, There are other means to determine if a contact were made such as attempting to contact those people directly. Reading between your lines these contacts are from stations that did not submit
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 t
Once again, my faith in the ethics of contesting is fully restored. Eventually, it would seem, that crying wolf would be unnecessary, when simply asking for an explanation would suffice. Thank you Do
So in conclusion:- Peter G4MJS _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
Dougs 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.
I wonder how many times that a suspicious log was investigated and the recording indicated a proper operation. John KK9A Hi Doug, Seems like the recording is a 2nd chance for the operator to redeem t
Exactly! This all would have been a no issue at all if we all were just given "Just the facts mam" from the beginning. It should be just like a court of Law. If you are found guilty of a crime, they
WRONG -- it also gives cheaters clues about what things they do can be detected, and, what cannot. 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@cont
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 fu
This constant kvetching cant be good for contesting. It certainly does nothing to make me fret about spending more time on archery than on the radio. Go have your stringently enforced contests. I don
I respectfully disagree Jim. Of course, it depends on how the announcement is made. If I were asked, which I have not been, an announcement could have been posted on the contest blog or webpage, some
The casual contester doesn't care about any of this because it doesn't affect them. It's a good thing to call out the bad apples. Once again, the CQ Contest Committee did a top notch job improving t
I agree Ron. What other sport/activity just DQ's you or changes your class and tells you nothing? How is one to learn or understand their mistakes if one is not told what the issue was? This can be
Interesting thread. I often worry about the example of the contesters who go to a fun location in the Carribean for a "let's have fun and get on the radio" operation, and, for whatever reason, do ver