Hi Victor,
Thanks. I voted, but the poll lacks nuance.
In the case of contests that specifically bar the practice for non-assisted
stations, you're closer to onside than offside, even if your practice prevents
people who can access that information from doing so.
I think the wider issue may be whether it is incumbent upon you to change your
policies to meet contest rules, or whether adherence to rules is an individual
responsibility. Your system isn't bound by the rules: the people using it are.
Is it your responsibility to police your users?
Another wider issue is whether it is incumbent upon you or operators of other
systems (RBN, etc.) to apply arbitrary interpretations of rules: for instance,
not everybody agrees that seeing P40V is somewhere on 20 is the same as seeing
P40V is on 14.075. It is a leap of logic to equate the former with being
"assistance."
Which is why I suggest committees intent on barring access to band information
should state such, as a distinct issue to the subject of assistance.
73, kelly, ve4xt
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 8, 2017, at 10:29, Victor Androsov <victor.androsov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Randy, Kelly, Rudy,
>
> Thanks a lot for for your opinion. Please don't take our decision on
> disabling bands breakdowns as the last one which never could be changed. I
> understand your points and honestly I'm personally against any kind of
> limitations if they are not provided by rules/low. But in this case we've
> tried to follow community feedback and contest committee recommendations.
> Anyway since we have started that discussion let's finish it with some sort
> of final value conclusion.
>
> We have opened a final poll to see how many operators support that decision:
>
> http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=5989c28be4b05211e16fef3d
>
> Please spend one minute of your time for voting. Your opinion would be highly
> appreciated.
>
>
> 73!
>
> Victor
>
> VA2WA
>
>> On 8 August 2017 at 09:53, Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net> wrote:
>> It should be at the discretion of nobody but the contest committees for
>> individual contests as to what is permitted and what is not. (Subject to
>> laws, of course.)
>>
>> It should not be, with all due respect, Victor, placed on your shoulders the
>> burden of "interpreting" the rules or the wishes of the wider contest
>> community.
>>
>> If the committee for a particular contest wishes to bar single-operator
>> stations from viewing band information, it is incumbent on that committee to
>> say so. (Kudos to NAQP for doing just that.)
>>
>> Further, I suggest we divorce the two: band breakdowns are not "assistance,"
>> no matter how poorly chosen that word is. Assistance specifically refers to
>> information that tells you "if you tune to this exact frequency, you are
>> likely to find this exact station."
>>
>> Which is NOT to say contests can't regulate against viewing band breakdowns.
>> Just that they're two distinct animals. A band breakdown, at best, will tell
>> you only that if you tune from 14.000 to 14.350, you MIGHT find this station.
>>
>> Arbitrary interpretations of rules are not helpful and sow confusion, not
>> clarity. If the rule doesn't say a practice is disallowed, then it's, except
>> when banned by government regulations, allowed. But adherence to a station's
>> country's laws is already required by the rules.
>>
>> The spirit of the rules isn't worth the paper it isn't written on. Your take
>> on "the spirit" may differ from the next guy's. Doesn't necessarily mean
>> either of you is breaking the rules.
>>
>> 73, kelly, ve4xt
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Aug 8, 2017, at 08:35, Rudy Bakalov via CQ-Contest
>> > <cq-contest@contesting.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Victor,
>> >
>> > First and foremost thank you for promoting and developing the concept of
>> > online scoreboards. Even though they have been around for a while they
>> > have not been actively promoted. Personally, I have found them fun,
>> > motivating, and quite effective in attracting kids to contesting.
>> >
>> > IMHO, and as your own poll data shows, the level of details should be a
>> > personal choice, not your choice. By making the decision yourself you are
>> > inserting yourself in the endless debate of what assistance means. You
>> > really don't want to be in this business and subject yourself to constant
>> > criticism.
>> >
>> > Rudy N2WQ
>> >
>> > Sent using a tiny keyboard. Please excuse brevity, typos, or
>> > inappropriate autocorrect.
>> >
>> >
>> >> On Aug 7, 2017, at 10:53 PM, Victor Androsov <victor.androsov@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Randy,
>> >>
>> >> As you know we are always trying to follow HAM community. Before make a
>> >> decision we've opened a poll about bands breakdown view on a score board.
>> >> You can see this poll results here :
>> >> https://contestonlinescore.com/poll.png.
>> >> We've also contacted some NAQP guys and got their opinion.
>> >>
>> >> Since more than 50% of voters wish to limit breakdown view by one or
>> >> another way we decided to disable that option for NAQP CW in kind of trial
>> >> mode. Honestly I think we've chosen the right way since I've never seen so
>> >> many single ops on any score boards before as it was during NAQPC CW. I
>> >> believe many of them joined to a live score board for the first time. ))
>> >> So
>> >> we are going to keep this limitation for the next NAQP SSB and probably
>> >> for
>> >> the CQ WW RTTY/SSB/CW as well.
>> >>
>> >> Anyway, if majority of operators would convince us to remove that
>> >> limitation we could easily do that. We still collect all the breakdowns
>> >> data but suspend publishing it on the board if that particular contest
>> >> configured to disable breakdown view. We are always opened for any
>> >> suggestions and feedbacks ))
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 73!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Victor
>> >>
>> >> VA2WA
>> >>
>> >>> On 6 August 2017 at 23:35, Randy Thompson K5ZD <k5zd@charter.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I do not understand why you feel an obligation to remove features from
>> >>> the
>> >>> scoreboard to prevent an entry being considered as "assisted."
>> >>>
>> >>> From the NAQP rules:
>> >>>
>> >>> "Access to spotting information
>> >>> obtained directly or indirectly
>> >>> from any source other than the
>> >>> station operator, such as from
>> >>> other stations or automated
>> >>> tools, is prohibited."
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> There is no definition as to the meaning of "spotting information." When
>> >>> we
>> >>> look at the general ARRL contest rules and at the CQ contests, the
>> >>> concept
>> >>> of spotting information generally includes callsign, frequency, and time.
>> >>> The scoreboard provides none of these.
>> >>>
>> >>> I found use of the scoreboard to be very enjoyable during NAQP CW. It
>> >>> definitely helped me stay on the air and make more QSOs than I had
>> >>> planned
>> >>> or would have given the conditions.
>> >>>
>> >>> The scoreboard should include all features. If someone doesn't want to
>> >>> contribute their band information, they can choose not to do so in their
>> >>> logger. If they feel looking at the band info changes their category,
>> >>> they
>> >>> should choose not to click on the link that takes them to that info.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Randy, K5ZD
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>> >>>> Victor Androsov
>> >>>> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2017 2:46 PM
>> >>>> To: cq-contest
>> >>>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] NAQP CW this weekend
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hi all,
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> This weekend we expect good activity on the score board (
>> >>>> https://contestonlinescore.com ) since we have disabled breakdown info
>> >>>> for the NAQP contests. We think that would be safe now for single ops.
>> >>>> Using of online score board during the contest will not be considered as
>> >>>> undeclared assistance.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Please register and start configuring your loggers before the contest so
>> >>>> we could have enough time to assist you with the logger settings in case
>> >>>> of some issues.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 73!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Victor
>> >>>>
>> >>>> VA2WA
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> 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
|
