Hi,
very difficult matter ;-)
The pattern of a station not submitting a log can be traced fairly well
by extracting all loglines with this call from the database of submitted
logs (tracelog or similarly named) which contains up to 90 percent of
all contacts. Such patterns often increase the number of grey hairs of
log checkers as they vary from "consistently wrong sent exchange" to
"completely erractic sent exchanges". Imagine e.g. someone learning his
error after some dozen contacts and from that time on sending the
correct exchange...
Every sponsor has to develop its workflow for such cases. You cannot
extinguish difficult cases as long as we still want the activity of
casuals (or only score QSOs having the other log submitted - which seems
unfair, too).
And only few contests allow for strictly stating "log what is expected
by the database regardless what was sent in reality". That does not work
with serials and most other exchanges.
SDR recordings help additionally - but at the price of nearly infinite
time to invest. So, to the chagrin of the "check faster, present results
immediately" crowd some amount of human referee time seems reasonable to
reach fair solutions (including "in case of doubt...") for the very very
different instances of stations with strange exchanges - be it for
working in two contests simultaneously or simply operating in
"smurf"-style (shameless ad: a short overview about this zoo and what
can be done with SDR recordings in this short presentation from DARC's
Contest University 2016
http://www.darc.de/fileadmin/filemounts/referate/dx/contest/wag/2015/Ergebnisse_Statistiken/SDR_web_e.pdf).
73, Chris DL8MBS (WAG
<http://www.darc.de/der-club/referate/dx/contest/wag/en/>)
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|