ENFORCEMENT-contests and otherwise

KE5FI at aol.com KE5FI at aol.com
Thu Dec 21 23:09:43 EST 1995

I even feel uncomfortable when someone is disqualified in a contest for
whatever reason...We have too many kilocycle cops.  Not only the government,
but whoever can get it, wants to take your space.

(And it ain't lawyers...I seen 'em and I are one!)



>From Bill Turner <wrt at eskimo.com>  Fri Dec 22 06:58:36 1995
From: Bill Turner <wrt at eskimo.com> (Bill Turner)
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 22:58:36 -0800
Subject: Shame on N2AA for not repeating the message.
Message-ID: <199512220659.WAA23066 at mail.eskimo.com>

At 11:53 AM 12/21/95 EST, Kurt Pauer wrote:
>Really, why do people repeat messages in reply messages?  I have not
>been able to figure that out.  Is there any GOOD reason to retransmit
>a message that has already been sent to everyone? 
Well, suppose I had skipped the above and just posted a message that said "I
find it is more effective that way".  Would you know what I was talking
about?  Would others?  How much bandwidth would be wasted asking me what on
earth AM I talking about?  

I agree that more editing of the repeated messages could be done in most
cases, but to eliminate them entirely would cause a lot of confusion, I think.

73, Bill  W7LZP
wrt at eskimo.com

>From Robert Penneys <radio at UDel.Edu>  Fri Dec 22 11:45:05 1995
From: Robert Penneys <radio at UDel.Edu> (Robert Penneys)
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 06:45:05 -0500
Subject: Where is Write-Log?
Message-ID: <199512221145.GAA26010 at copland.udel.edu>

A while ago, Write-Log, a Windows-based contest logging program, was 
available by FTP.

Is it still? Would you know from where?

Also, has anyone used this puppy and have any comment?

Tnx, Bob WN3K

>From Robert Penneys <radio at UDel.Edu>  Fri Dec 22 11:46:44 1995
From: Robert Penneys <radio at UDel.Edu> (Robert Penneys)
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 06:46:44 -0500
Subject: N.E.R.D.S. needed fr NAQP/Sprint teams!!!
Message-ID: <199512221146.GAA26035 at copland.udel.edu>

Yes, it's been too long. Let's put the N.E.R.D.S. back together for
NAQP and Sprint.

Sign up now!!!

Bob WN3K

>From Bill Fisher  KM9P <km9p at akorn.net>  Fri Dec 22 13:47:51 1995
From: Bill Fisher  KM9P <km9p at akorn.net> (Bill Fisher KM9P)
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 08:47:51 -0500 (EST)
Subject: W4 NAQPers ???
Message-ID: <Pine.BSD/.3.91.951222084701.6040A-100000 at paris.akorn.net>

Any of you red necks want to put a couple of teams together?

Bill, KM9P

>From Dr. Eugene Zimmerman" <ezimmerm at DGS.dgsys.com  Fri Dec 22 14:07:14 1995
From: Dr. Eugene Zimmerman" <ezimmerm at DGS.dgsys.com (Dr. Eugene Zimmerman)
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 09:07:14 -0500 (EST)
Subject: ENFORCEMENT-contests and otherwise
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.951222084108.13738A-100000 at DGS>


I too cringe when I see someone disqualified from a contest.  But I can 
assure you that at least for the CQ and the ARRL contests, this is quite 
rare and done only as a last resort.  Many more stations COULD be disqualified
under the published rules but very very few actually are.

Careful log checking and an occasional disqualification, when warrented, 
is a necessary function of running a contest.  How else can be be sure that 
the logs are accurate and that the participants are honest?

In the utopian world of Plato, there were originally no laws and all the 
inhabitants lived moral and ethical lives.  But even Plato knew that in a 
human society, this was a false utopia, and so followed up with the 
treatise called "Laws" where ethical and moral behavior was codified for 
a real society.  I wish there were no reason to check logs and disqualify 
people but we too live in the real world and without these checks and 
balances, contests would be a sham.

Of course there are some egregious forms of cheating -- running real 
superpower - judicious use of packet by single ops, and so forth -- for 
which the standards of proof for disqualification are difficult or 
impossible to meet.  But those who win or place high by practicing any 
form of deliberate cheating and derive pleasure from their standing are 
more to be pitied than admired.

Finally you are right when you say

> (And it ain't lawyers...I seen 'em and I are one!)

If there were no contesters searching for loopholes in the rules to give 
them an advantage over their competitors instead of trying to improve 
their contesting skills and their stations so they could compete on their 
merits, the rules could be much simpler and there would not be these long 
threads on the reflector featuring dissection of the loopholes by the 
contesting "lawyers".  Maybe that is the problem, these guys are 
practicing law without a license.

73  Gene  W3ZZ

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list