Part that amazes me is, Cheating Now should be (except for the power
aspect) soo easy now to catch with all the computer logs and all that?
Think of 20 or 30 years ago when it was all paper logs and dupe sheets.
And you had to try to understand someones penmanship.
Geez if cheating is soo hard to detect now that they need to send out
the phone cops, how in hell did they ever catch anyone in the old days?
Maybe it was Fred & Barney with one of their teradactyl(sp?) editors
checking each log
Joe WB9SBD
David Gilbert wrote:
>Personally, I think the latest additions to the rules by CQ WW are
>pretty clumsy and are highly unlikely to have much effect, if any, but
>we can hardly blame them for grasping at straws to try to get the
>situation under control. What percentage of contesters are getting
>caught cheating? Does anyone seriously think that trivial fraction
>represents the majority of the significant cheaters?
>
>The ones that have been getting DQ'd are at or near the very top of the
>results listings and are obvious targets for increased scrutiny. I'd
>bet that the contest committee is not able to apply that same attention
>very many rungs down the ladder, and yet the guy who cheats to leapfrog
>five spots to 20th position is just as reprehensible as the one who
>cheats to get into the top 3. If you consider the percentage of top 5
>(or 10 or whatever) placements that have gotten caught cheating, the
>situation looks a bit more ominous. Why would anyone think that doesn't
>exist on a broader scale? Look at any poll of attitudes toward cheating
>in any aspect of human life and you don't find anything like 98%
>condemnation of it. Why would ham radio be any different, especially
>when people are passionate enough about it to spend the money that they
>do. Cheating is a lot cheaper ...
>
>Anyone who has spent much time contesting, or associating with others
>who do, has witnessed or heard first hand accounts of someone running
>excess power or using other means to cheat. How many times did you hear
>anyone say they did anything about it, though ... either chastising the
>culprit or turning him in?
>
>We've all read the public responses from those who have gotten caught
>cheating. How many of them sounded contrite? There have even been
>comments from casual observers on this very reflector regarding cheating
>that follow the path of "everyone does it, so what's the big deal?"
>
>So where is all this supposed peer pressure? Where is the self
>policing? Why is there WAY more indignation being heaped upon the
>contest committee than on the identified cheaters? If you want to
>slam the CQ WW contest committee for using a fork to cut an apple, have
>at it. But if you think they're over-reacting to isolated violations, I
>think a realistic view of the situation might suggest otherwise. And in
>my opinion, we have only ourselves to blame for it.
>
>Flame on ....
>
>73,
>Dave AB7E
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.59/2310 - Release Date: 08/17/09
>18:04:00
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|