I am no fan of deciding to end contest classes to counter cheating.
It strikes me as gutless, as in, "We don't want to make cheaters mad, so
we'll just rewrite the rules so their cheating isn't cheating anymore."
But what about everybody who liked the eliminated classification? (Such as
SO unassissted.)
Apply extra log analysis to the competitive stations, correlating spots,
particularly bad spots, with QSOs worked. Set a limit to the number of times
a station may work and log a bad spot with the wrong call and use that to
reclassify or DQ the operator.
If Station A works stations with the same mistake as bad spots once or
twice, perhaps it's just because he made the same mistake as the guy who did
the spotting. But after a certain number, the pattern is pretty hard to
argue against.
With loggers that now include frequency data, if someone jumps in frequency
frequently just after a spot, that's also a hard pattern to argue.
Nobody really should get their insides in a knot over whether a guy cheats
from 192nd place to 189th, but inside the Top 10s? Certainly.
We would never want to eliminate robbery by making it legal to steal, so why
do we want to punish the rule-abiding unassisted operators who actually like
unassisted?
It's time for some contest organizers to grow a pair. Seriously. If it's
really bad, add a promise not to sue to the rules, with a lifetime ban for
anyone who does try to sue because of log checking.
73, kelly
ve4xt
On 12/14/14 9:02 AM, "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Really? Applaud?
You applaud the end of solo contesting? That "just a boy
> and his radio" cannot continue to independently compete as a category?
Why
> does that pending extinction draw your enthusiastic approval?
73, de Hans,
> K0HB/K7
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 3:49 AM, Steve Lott <lottsphoto@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> I applaud their change !
> cheers!
> steve
> KG5VK
>
> http://www.KG5VK.com
> My Ham Radio Friends
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 10:09
> AM, Radio K0HB <kzerohb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> WRTC qualification should not
> be about social engineering and "incentive
>> for change". It should be about
> "selecting the most skilled".
>>
>>
>> 73, de Hans, K0HB/K7
>>
>> On Sat, Dec
> 13, 2014 at 7:26 AM, Oliver Sweningsen <w6nv@pacbell.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
> Some have said that in the past, the 'best' operators 'wanted' to
>> compete
> in
>> > the unassisted category.
>> >
>> > The WRTC qualification process will
> provide the incentive for change.
>> Two
>> > Bob Dylan quotes come to mind:
> "Yesterday's just a memory, tomorrow is
>> never
>> > what it's supposed to
> be." And, "You don't need a weatherman to know
>> which
>> > way the wind
> blows."
>> >
>> > Check the scores and, follow the leader(s).
>> >
> _______________________________________________
>> > 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
|