In this scenario, I would expect that some UA1 will win the contest with a
score of 0.
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Art
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 6:30 AM
To: CQ-Contest Reflector <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] VY1JA Two QSO's Talk about Murphy..
First, I hold the record for minimum score in a real contest (see below, for
meaning of "real").
Not so many years ago I was still using CT-DOS for a Stew Perry TBDC. When
generating the Cabrillo log, some glitch in the software left some extra
characters at the end of each QSO line. The Contest Sponsor's log checking
software decided that those characters invalidated each QSO. I wound up
with a published score of zero.
Second, negative scores are not new.
I believe that in the most recent Poisson d'Avril Contest, the Sponsor
tweaked the log checking software so that all entries (other than the
Sponsor's) wound up with negative scores. Thus, the Sponsor's amazing
string of victories continued.
Credible rumors have been reported that for the next running of the Poisson
d'Avril the Sponsor will use advanced technology-- building on the
technology of Skimmer, RBN, and Live Scoreboards -- to monitor all ongoing
QSOs, and hack into each participant's computer to modify the log before it
is submitted. The log will appear correct on the user's screen, but every
QSO in the submitted log will be busted.
What about the possibility that contestants might develop computer security
systems that result in un-corrupted logs being submitted?
The rumors report that the Sponsor is already working (perhaps with Amazon,
although that data is less reliable) on deployable mini-drone low-power RF
generators that create QRN, QRM, and even bogus QSO signals. A drone (or
drones, if needed) will hover near each participant's antenna(s), so each
participant will actually be busting every QSO. Manipulation of the logs
will no longer be required.
The RF drones will be linked in microwave smart-mesh networks to protect
against the possibility of counter-correcting log errors -- two contestants'
logs having matching errors that accidentally create a valid QSO.
The rumors include an even less credible, but even more futuristic, aspect:
The Sponsor is funding research into warping sunspots and other aspects of
space weather that affect HF propagation. The goal is to have the bands
completely dead for all participants except for the Sponsor, who will make
but one QSO -- with him/herself, operating a remote station.
These two advanced efforts are being led by Pd'ACARPA -- the Poisson d'Avril
Contest Advanced Research Projects Agency. In-house, the Agency is called
just "CARP". CARP's source of funding has not been exposed, but many
believe that some funding comes from the money saved by the sponsors of
"real" contests sending the various winners print-it-yourself e-mail
certificates instead of providing proper calligraphy-on-parchment
Now, having reported these things to the CQ-Contest Reflector community, I
offer the following advice for your protection.
First, the first story is true. (You could look it up.) We should probably
look over our Cabrillo logs before we hit he Send button.
Second, the second story is a complete fiction (except the part about the
Sponsor winning every running of the Poisson d'Avril Contest; I really
admire the creativity that has gone into the Pd'A). However, I must make
that disclaimer/clarification because whenever I post something humorous or
sarcastic here on the CQ-Contest Reflector, somebody takes it seriously and
starts a whole contentiousness.
73, Art K3KU
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list