[CQ-Contest] Contest Ethics - A Case Study?

[Zack Widup]

On Wed, 20 May 1998 k7zo at micron.net wrote:

> With the official SSB Sweepstakes results now out I thought I would post 
> this message to generate some discussion and comments regarding contest 
> ethics. The idea for this posting came to me about 0330 last November 
> 17th -- right after the end of the contest. When I finished the contest 
> I fired up my internet connection, went to the OH2BUA web site, and 
> downloaded the last 1000 DX Spots. My reason at the time was to see if 
> anyone had spotted me. Being in semi-rare Idaho, I was curious. I did 
> find a couple cases of me being spotted, but what was more interesting 
> were the incredible number of self-spots, sweep pleadings, and the like. 
> I got to wondereing what these folks were up to. At a minimum it seemed 
> like they were in the Multi-operator Class and I wondered what their 
> entry would be. On the other hand some of these folks could be in the
> contest for the fun of it and in my book you can do anything you want
> subject to the terms of your license. But, if you make an official entry, 
> stating that you followed the rules of the contest that is another matter.
> And to restate the appropriate Sweepstakes rules extracted from the ARRL 
> site:
> 
>     A.Single operator. One person performs all transmitting, receiving, 
>       spotting and logging functions. 
> 
>     B.Multioperator, single transmitter only. Those obtaining any form 
>       of assistance such as relief operators, loggers or use of spotting 
>       nets, including PacketClusters. 
> 
>     D.The use of non-Amateur Radio means of communication (eg, 
>       telephone) for the purpose of soliciting a contact (or contacts) 
>       during the contest period is inconsistent with the spirit and 
>       intent of this announcement. 
> 
> At the end of this note is the data extracted from the Last 1000 DX 
> Spots on OH2BUA. These were the spots that caught my eye. If you look 
> through the list you will find the following callsigns. I put them into 
> three different categories per their entry class indicated in QST.
> 
> * Entered as Single Operator (indicating they did not use 
> PacketCluster): WB8RNY, W0VFO, K2MP, N9PQU

It is possible to make packet spots without receiving any yourself.  I 
have done this in the past.  The rules do not prohibit your spotting 
stations for the use of others if you are not receiving any (and hence 
are unassisted). It's VERY hard to determine if this was the case, though.  
But I would give them the benefit of the doubt with the caveat that 
they're being watched.

> 
> * Entered as Multi Operator (indicating they used PacketCluster, but 
> what about the soliciting contact angle?): W5GAD, W5YM, KC3M, N2WB, 
> WK1P, N1HKO, AE1M, WW3S, N9XX
> 
> * No contest entry made (I guess they were just in it for the fun): 
> Everyone else
> 
> So, what do you all think? I offer this note to generate discussion not 
> to pass judgment. I am simply reporting here, the facts should stand for 
> themselves.

Just because you got the spots off Internet doesn't mean these people 
were also using Internet.  Our local PacketCluster gets most of the USA 
spots that you'd see over Internet when most of the nodes are connected.  
This is an amateur radio means of soliciting Q's. I don't think any of 
these nodes get THEIR data from Internet (correct me if I'm wrong.)

> 
> Scott/K7ZO k7zo at micron.net
> 

73, Zack W9SZ



--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com