Bob,
I don't think anyone thinks the issue should be ignored. It's more about the
approach to resolving the issue.
Since I have been visiting this reflector, I have learned that the approach to
resolving issues of questionable contest ethics utilized by several regulars on
this board is the "public fry method".
Some prefer these matters be handled privately. The same goal can be achieved
without the public embarrassment. I understand that this method is effective
with blatant cheaters, but with all resolutions come unexpected consequences.
This is why I have been so vocal about the public logs issue. Many think that
if we just put the logs out there, someone will evaluate them and we can make a
public spectacle of the cheaters. Again, no one is thinking about the
unexpected consequences, such as someone being mistakenly publicly ridiculed or
their logs being used competitively against them. Right or wrong, fair or not,
these are unintended consequences that should be evaluated closely.
It seems the entertainment value some get out of these public ridiculings is
the driving factor. Personaly, I think it should stop. Until it does, I shall
continue to speak out. Why? Because I happen to be one of those rare
individuals that doesn't need my self worth validated by the acceptence of any
particular group.
David ~ KY1V
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Robert Chudek - K0RC
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:11 PM
To: John Warren; Contest Contest
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] PU2FAN, etc
Apology? For what? Reporting what was going on with packet spots? Hardly!
So John, what would your magnanimous approach be toward resolving this
perceived issue?
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Warren" <nt5c@texas.net>
To: "Contest Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] PU2FAN, etc
> David K1TTT wrote :
>
>> My way the peer feedback is direct and timely. Hopefully he learned
>> a good
>> lesson and will be back in the next contest, sans packet.
>
> Hmmmm. I think that attitude is very hard toward this young fellow
> David. I'm a serious DXer and not a contest entrant, but if you had
> highlighted me in that way, I would have told you where to stuff your
> contest, and it would be years - if ever - before I competed again.
> It would have been magnanimous (and "contest-promoting") for an
> experienced guy like you to offer an apology, or at least an
> explanation, to this young Brazilian. There's a bigger picture to
> think about.
>
> 73, John, NT5C.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|