To paraphrase Dr. Ian Malcolm in Jurassic Park.... Cheaters will find a way.
73 -- Paul VO1HE
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Dick-w0raa
> Sent: December 13, 2007 15:52
> To: cq-contesting
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Shut down the clusters during a contest. SImple.
>
> Has anybody given thought to asking the people who
> own/operate the various clusters, to voluntarily shut them
> down during contest periods? What did we do before there
> were clusters and packet? We fouind stations to work, the
> old fashioned way. We turned the knob and looked for them.
> God forbid we should have to do that today. What a horrible thought.
>
> So, why not just get all of them to voluntarily turn them off
> at the onset of a contest and then turn them back on at the
> end of the contest? I think it's doable, so why not do it?
> Then we'd find out if these big gun winners are as big gunned
> as they claim to be. It's certainly worth considering.
>
> Also, all contests should be limited to 100 watts. Now
> there's where the cheating would go. Cheaters would be
> saying: "Me, more than 100 watts? Not me, I follow the rules!"
>
> Dick
> W0RAA
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Fatchett W0MU" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
> To: "Randy Thompson" <k5zd@charter.net>; "Untitled"
> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 4:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
>
>
> > Assisted seems to have less competitors which translates to higher
> > finishes...
> >
> > I most cases if you are chasing spots you are probably not
> winning. Run
> > run
> > run run run.
> >
> >
> > On 12/12/07 4:37 PM, "Randy Thompson" <k5zd@charter.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Because some of us still like to do things the old
> fashioned way. All by
> >> ourselves! And we like the fact that we can compete in a
> category with
> >> other people who feel the same way. Even makes it more
> fun when we can
> >> beat
> >> the packet assisted guys.
> >>
> >> I am against combining them because I like to be
> recognized as a guy who
> >> knows how to operate.
> >>
> >> I wouldn't mind if they were combined because then all the
> SOA guys who
> >> think they are competitive will realize that packet does
> not a winning
> >> score
> >> make.
> >>
> >> Randy, K5ZD
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> >>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Yuri VE3DZ
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 7:08 PM
> >>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> >>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
> >>>
> >>> I don't like Dx Cluster, but the reality is - like it or not
> >>> - almost everyone is using it nowadays, one way or another. I
> >>> mean 99.9 % of the HAM stations have the capability of using
> >>> Dx Cluster today.
> >>> So, why not just allow it for all categories, like it was
> >>> done for WAE or Russian DX long time ago?
> >>>
> >>> What are we afraid of here?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yuri VE3DZ
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|