ae327 at lafn.org
Tue Oct 18 22:01:45 EDT 1994
Re K1VR's comments on open logs -
There are two reasons why people oppose open logs:
1) Entrants have things in their logs that they don't want anyone
to see. This can include:
a) logging errors
b) contacts that did not occur
c) exclusive contacts with friends, XYLs, or operators of
2) Log checkers have something they don't want anyone to see.
This can include:
a) not checking the log at all
b) doing a poor job of checking the log.
Although these are understandable reasons, I personally do not
feel they justify secret logs. I wrote an article in the
March/April 1991 NCJ suggesting an open log policy in contests.
There were two other responses to K1VR's posting that deserve
I have personally examined, checked, and even judged a lot of
logs. I have yet to see a log with operating secrets that should
be kept private for legitimate competitive advantage.
If I operated in a contest where someone "fed" me bogus calls,
and my operating and callsign identification skills were
inadequate to detect this, and the judges' skills and efforts did
not detect it, I would be happy if a third party would point this
out. I would not want to receive credit for these contacts.
I have no objection to the sponsor of any contest showing any of
my entries to any interested person. If the interested people
feel more comfortable asking the contest sponsor for my log
than asking me, I think that is ok.
This would be a good topic for the CAC to take up regarding ARRL
contests. I understand that asking the log checkers to submit
their work to scrutiny might not be received well, but I think it
would benefit contesting overall.
Dick N6AA, (no E-mail address after Oct 19 for a while)
>From tree at cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) Wed Oct 19 05:39:09 1994
From: tree at cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 94 21:39:09 PDT
Subject: SS and packet spots
Message-ID: <9410190439.AA16892 at cmicro.com>
I just saw a record of packet spots during the last Sweepstakes and I
must admit being shocked. There were many spots and requests for information
on specific multipliers from stations who entered as single op.
I hope that responsible contest clubs will educate their members so
they can understand which box to check off on the summary sheet if
they are obtaining assistance looking for multipliers (ie: Multi-single).
And I quote from the rules:
Single operator: One person performs all transmitting, receiving, SPOTTING,
and logging functions.
Multioperator, single transmitter only: Those obtaining any form of
assistance, such as relief operators, loggers or USE OF SPOTTING NETS,
INCLUDING PACKET CLUSTERS.
Also note that the QRP category is only available as a single operator
(ie: no assistance).
With the number of logs the ARRL receives, it is not okay to check off
the single op box and then write somewhere that you used packet. They
don't have the time to look for that.
Also, the excuse that you score wasn't competitive doesn't hold much
water if your score was used for a club score. It will still count
for the club if it is multi-op.
Everyone should know the rules. Everyone should also know that the
packet activity is public domain and it is very clear who did what
after the contest. If packet continues to be abused in this manner,
it won't be hard to start disqualifying people who are cheating.
tree at cmicro.com
More information about the CQ-Contest