>>From Doug KR2Q:
>> Let this be a lesson to those who think that the cheaters "suffer" a
hollow victory. WRONG.
Those who massively cheat are THRILLED not only to "win," but even more so
to have "gotten away with it."
I guess that's addressed to me.
Part of what I said was, "If a cheater 'wins,' their victory will be hollow,
because, as with all immoral actions, they will ultimately find it to be
unsatisfying, and even damaging, because they know what they've done, even
if no one else does.", and later, "If they are victorious, any 'delight' is
only temporary at best, partly because it's not a real victory (and they
know it's not)." What I didn't say explicitly is that public exposure of
fraud accelerates the process.
>>It just depends on the culture and individual mind set. If you hate
cheaters, then you probably cannot begin to imagine what "thrill" the
cheaters have...no "hollow victory" no "regrets," no nothing but joy....they
"beat the man." No manner of condemnation or insult will matter.
I also said "Only an honest competitor will truly enjoy the win for the long
term." and "Being dishonest is a path to misery in the long term."
Nothing but joy? Perhaps Litton had some short-term delight from his fake
victories; notice that he seemed to need more and more of them to keep the
feelings going. In the long run, as the article said, "But whatever glory he
felt was surely short-lived. Not only had he become a consuming object of
contempt in one of the blogosphere's more obsessive neighborhoods; his
family and neighbors had learned that the online tribunal had judged him a
fraud."
In exchange for his fleeting "victories," he had to live a life full of lies
and deceit. Whatever positive feelings he may have temporarily felt from
others are now gone entirely, and instead people look down on him (probably
confirming his real view of himself). Do you think a person like that can be
truly happy, even before they're caught? That they are experiencing the same
kind of joy that comes with an honest victory?
The article also said, "This was what Litton was missing: the bonhomie and
collective uplift of one of the world's great athletic events, and the
rewards that come to anyone who goes the full distance and crosses the
finish line-never mind how long it takes." So Litton had some paper
"victories." But once again, he missed out on one of the best parts of the
competition. What kinds of victories are those? My view is that it's
ultimately just a friggin' piece of paper. So what? Would more rules stop
this kind of cheating? Should all marathon runners who think they might have
a chance of winning now be now be forced to audio and video record their
entire race? If someone is whispering tips in their ear by radio, should
they be considered "assisted"?
> Just DQ them, or better yet, don't even work them.
I'm all for that. The main points I was trying to make are that we shouldn't
make life difficult for the honest competitors just because of a few cheats,
and that making it easier to be honest is a good thing. Natural consequences
are part of the ultimate reward or punishment. In the case of cheaters,
being DQ'd or not worked would certainly fall in that category. (OK, so
where can I find a list of known cheats, so I know who not to work?)
73, Rick ZL2HAM
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|