Mike,
This discussion is wandering far from what originated it.
There was nothing in my response addressing the "fixing" of any log
information after the contest is over. That is another issue altogether.
Also, the hypothetical presented to me by KQ2M did not include a
"challenged operator" as a given and therefore I did not address this in
my comments. Nothing more, nothing less.
Now that you have asked, I think that if there was such an operator, that
any reasonable contest sponsor "would have a heart" [a phrase popular here
in Texas these days] and allow for such a thing if asked to do so - as an
exception.
I'm not sure what you're talking about regarding the publishing of
disqualifications - there are many listed in the results of the recent
contests that were just published in CQ Magazine and others like the RDXC
as one huge example.
Regarding those not in the top-ten box, Joe Contester as you call him,
perhaps you can describe some of these "needs and concerns" of his that
are not being addressed?
> Bob,
>
> The only thing that has changed is the medium in how the log is logged?
> Before computers we logged on paper, now we log in on the computer with
> one and zeroes. Is a tape recorder or digital recording is a log as it
> is a record of that stations contacts. I bet someday there might be a
> technology that could read the digital medium and create an acceptable
> log. The requirement of CQ is that the log is submitted in a digital
> format following the Cabrillo format and that Cabrillo log must be
> submitted by a specific date.
>
> What is the contest period? Is it defined by CQ or the ARRL? They way
> I read the rules is that you have 48 hours to contact as many stations
> in that time period. The rules tell me when I have to have my log in and
> in what format. I did not read anywhere that says I cannot fix mistakes
> after 2359:59. If you want everything to end at 2359:59 then BY RULE
> require the logs to be submitted within 5 minutes of the end of contest.
>
> I have far better things to do than listen to a 48 hour contest again in
> the hope to eeek out a few points to win a paper certificate or a $75
> plaque. I am not a proponent of a capable competitor computer logging
> and then going over tapes or digital recordings either but how many
> people if any are really doing this and with what result? Why anyone
> feels the need to cheat for effectively nothing is beyond me.
>
> You easily dismissed taping a contest when it came to a sight challenged
> competitor, what if that competitor submitted a top score. Are you
> saying that his/her log would be judged differently? The rules appear
> to be pretty clear to apply equally to each entrant.
>
> The above is one of a number of issues that could come up that muddies
> the waters. We must be sure that we do not exclude people from wanting
> to join in the fun. It is the casual ops that really make most of these
> contests go. Without them we would all work each other pretty quickly
> and be bored for the rest of the contest.
>
> Instead of producing documents of opinion and good operating practices
> that are not part of the rules, why can't the organizers write complete
> and concise rules stating what is and what is not acceptable if it is
> such a concern to them?
>
> I have seen numerous accusations but I believe I have only seen one
> disqualification recently. If it is a big deal then why is there not a
> link on the main CQ WW contest page to all the entries that have DQed
> and why? We all know there are power abusers but what is done about
> them? I bet I can make a bunch more contacts if I ran 5kw that would
> easily make up for any errors that could be found by going back over a
> recorded contest.
>
> Are the contest committees addressing the needs and concerns of all
> contesters or just the top tier? Is Joe the Contester equally
> represented in these committees?
> >
> Mike W0MU
>
> J6/W0MU November 21 - December 1 2011 CQ WW DX CW
> W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net
>
>
> On 9/29/2011 2:02 AM, Bob Naumann wrote:
>> Mike,
>>
>> The proposed scenario I was commenting on is completely different from
>> what
>> you're apparently discussing.
>>
>> The scenario I commented on is "can you operate the entire contest
>> without
>> logging anything, just tape record the entire contest, and after the
>> contest
>> has ended, then create a log from the listening to and transcribing the
>> recordings".
>>
>> We're not merely talking about massaging or fixing a log - there is no
>> log
>> at all until after the contest has ended.
>>
>> My personal opinion on this is that such a practice should not be
>> allowed
>> for all the reasons I listed in my earlier comments. My primary
>> objection is
>> that the operator who is not putting any effort into logging has not
>> done a
>> key part of the process during the contest period - that is, creating a
>> record of who he worked - i.e.; logging. That is a very important part
>> of
>> operating a contest, and doing it after the contest ends should not be
>> allowed. In effect, if it were to be allowed, it would extend the
>> contest
>> period for that person until the log submission deadline, where all
>> other
>> competitors would have completed their logging at the end of the
>> contest.
>> That doesn't seem fair to me. Again, I'm not aware of any rules that
>> specifically permit or preclude such a process, but I don't like the
>> idea at
>> all.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Bob W5OV
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mike Fatchett
>> W0MU
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 5:14 PM
>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Determining ASSISTED vs NON-ASSISTED -- was:
>> =>RE:
>> Chea
>>
>> Bob,
>>
>> I think this is a big stretch. The contest period to me is the period
>> of time where valid contacts can be made.
>>
>> What you are suggesting is at the end of the contest much like the Iowa
>> Tests of Basic Skills put your pencil down and you are done. At the end
>> of the contest all loggers will lock down the log and you can't change
>> it. I don't think this is the intent of CQ or ARRL. We all make
>> mistakes in the heat of battle. Most believe that obvious errors or
>> notes can be addressed after the contest period has ended. If not, why
>> are the dates to submit logs a month out form most contests?
>>
>> I am not saying that complete massaging of a log should be acceptable
>> either. In the old days we duped on the fly and then reduped and
>> corrected our penmanship issues was we went through the manual log.
>> Should an entrant not be given a chance to look for obvious typos and
>> correct them?
>>
>> The issue we have is that 10 people read the rules and we can have 10
>> different opinions of what the rules say. If there is to be no log
>> fixes after 2359:59 then the rules should be specific and say so.
>>
>>
>> Mike W0MU
>>
>> J6/W0MU November 21 - December 1 2011 CQ WW DX CW
>> W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net
>>
>>
>> On 9/28/2011 6:38 AM, Bob Naumann wrote:
>>> Peter,
>>>
>>> We're not discussing those with physical challenges such as you are
>>> mentioning nor are the rules written to address these sorts of
>>> exceptions.
>>>
>>> The contest is as follows: (from cqww.com)
>>>
>>> CQ WW DX Contest Rules 2011
>>> SSB: October 29 - 30 CW: November 26 - 27
>>> Starts 0000 UTC Saturday Ends 2400 UTC Sunday
>>>
>>> The contest ends at 2400 UTC Sunday. (Or, 23:59:59 really)
>>>
>>> Clearly, if someone does no logging at all during the contest, and
>>> begins
>>> the logging process after the contest ends, he is not logging during
>>> the
>>> contest.
>>>
>>> Such a practice would extend the contest period for that operator and
>>> is
>> not
>>> permitted in any document I have ever seen for any contest.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Bob W5OV
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Peter Voelpel
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:51 PM
>>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
>>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Determining ASSISTED vs NON-ASSISTED -- was:
>> =>RE:
>>> Chea
>>>
>>> I don´t agree I don´t find the rule that tape logging is not allowed.
>>> Where do I find that rule about transcriptions?
>>> No rule prohibits tape logging.
>>> The logging was done during the contest.
>>>
>>> I am just thinking of the blind, who never could send in a log without
>>> transcription.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Peter, DJ7WW
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of w5ov@w5ov.com
>>>
>>>> 2nd situation:
>>>>
>>>> Op A is tired before the contest and decides to tape record everything
>>> and write it down after the contest, rather than keep a computer log
>>> during the contest. No other person helped him with the tape recording
>>> or transcription functions before or after the contest. Is this allowed
>>> in the SO Unasisted category?
>>>
>>> Short answer: No.
>>>
>>> Explanation: This is a trick question because transcribing the contest
>>> after the contest is not allowed in any category. The logging must be
>>> done
>>> during the contest period - the contest ends at 23:59z.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|