[CQ-Contest] SS-LOG Super-Check

[Pete Smith]

At 10:14 AM 3/6/99 EST, K5GA at aol.com wrote:
>
>I just got the answers back from Tree for my SS CW operation at WX0B.
>
>It was quite interesting, but I have some personal observations that I
want to
>share with the masses. However, before doing so, everyone please understand
>that I appreciate the log checking being done, but also understand I see some
>harm in it as well.
>
>#1..........SS is not Sprint. I don't feel SS should be checked as hard as
>Sprint because of the tremendous amount of unique information that is
>exchanged in SS. Too many variables with QRM and fading that allows one
dit to
>be lost which causes TWO QSOs lost. The penalty thing is ridiculous.

Why -- I was charged a penalty only for busted calls, not for errors in
exchanges.  Seems reasonable, cuz you get a couple of chances at the
callsign in SS.

I think it's high time that ARRL contests are held to a qualitative
standard.  I couldn't believe that neither my SSCW nor ARRL DXCW logs had a
single deletion last year, and I was happy with my 2.5 percent this year,
though will try to do better, of course.


73, Pete Smith N4ZR
n4zr at contesting.com 

Loud is.

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