Hi Jim et al --
Well, no need to wait for K1TTT to analyze bad spots.
I, Eric Scace K3NA, submitted a number of busted spots from the W1FJ
multi-op station (logged in to the packet cluster as W1KM, the site
owner's call).
Despite all good intentions to make clean spots, I made a few typos
made during S&P tuning that got sent as spots before I saw my error.
And there were a number of bad QSX frequencies that went out as spots
because N1MM Logger and I had different opinions about which of the
Orion's two receivers I was listening to (since both receivers were
active in my split headphones).
And I was responsible for an even more embarrassing spot Sunday
morning. After a long night on 40m, I hopped into the chair on 15m to
give another operator a break. Tuning up the band, I saw K3LR operating
at 21200.2. Still thinking in the 40m mindset, it seemed LR was
transmitting out of the band -- after all, we have to keep the
suppressed carrier frequency away from the band edge so the sideband
doesn't extend beyond. Well I know the crew at Tim's station wouldn't
want to be operating against the regulations ... so I sent a spot with a
comment about out-of-band, hoping the 15m op would see it. After
another sip of coffee, it dawned on me that this was 15m and USB... not
40m and LSB. Boy, was my face red!
Sorry, Tim and whoever was the 15m running op on duty!
And my apologies to everyone else for my other broken calls or
QSX/simplex errors.
Now, although I have no problem with taking responsibility for my
mistakes, the point of the above paragraphs is not the public
self-flagellation. Yes, I'm sorry for the errors... and particularly
unhappy that I publicly accused K3LR of transmitting out of the band.
But I don't think I'm a horribly incompetent contester. I'm just human
-- I get tired, occasionally I make errors, and occasionally I think the
software is in one state when it's actually in another. I try to
improve my logging accuracy and my spot accuracy -- but I'm not perfect.
With tens of thousands of spots generated over the weekend, even a
99% accuracy level will result in many spots containing errors.
It's fine to educate the contest community that spots may contain
errors, and to encourage everyone to log (and spot) as accurately as
possible.
Let's also acknowledge that even skilled contesters will make
errors... and the skilled contester knows that spot data may contain an
error.
Publicly naming individuals who generate bad spots seems pointless.
If we are to identify individuals, let's identify those who spot
error-free (golden spotters) as examples of what the rest of us strive
to accomplish.
73,
-- Eric "the occasional bad-spotter" K3NA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yccc-bounces@yccc.org [mailto:yccc-bounces@yccc.org] On Behalf Of Jim
> Idelson
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 10:53 AM
> To: David Robbins
> Cc: YCCC; CQ-Contest Post
> Subject: Re: [YCCC] [CQ-Contest] arrl dx ssb spotting report
>
> Ok, Dave. This is great stuff. But, now that you have almost completely
> eradicated malicious spotting from our world, you need a new challenge.
>
> Almost as detrimental as self-spotting, busted spotting is the next big
> problem to deal with. Guys who can't copy and can't type should not be
> passing their errors on to the rest of the world. So, how about some
> post-contest comparisons of spotted calls against the SCP database? For
> those who have posted 50 or more spots during the contest, what percent
> appear to be busted calls? Listed from highest percent to lowest, that would
> be a good way to expose the worst and the best!
>
> Going a step further, when we see SO2R repeatedly spotted as S02R on or near
> 14.027, can we figure out who first posted the bad call, and then identify
> those who in all likelihood blindly picked up the spot and propagated it
> further?
>
> 73,
>
> Jim Idelson K1IR
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|