[CQ-Contest] Re: super check-partial

[Doug Smith]

> Does anyone besides me think that the contest logging program should do
> recordkeeping tasks such record your log, tally up the score, and handle
> the post-contest paperwork...
> 
> ...but that it should *not* provide help on call signs
> (supercheck-partial), remember the exchange from another band and "fill
> in the blanks", and other similar "aids to copying"?

My personal feeling...

I don't see anything wrong with the program remembering the exchange
from another band.  This is information *you* copied; *you* are solely
responsible for its accuracy.  (of course, you do have to be sure you
logged what the other guy actually sent!)

Similarly, I have no problem with super check-partial *IF* the calls in
the database were copied by *you*.  (I use such a database, with TRLog,
containing only calls from my own logs)  Again, *you* are solely
responsible for the accuracy of the SCP database.  

Super check-partial with someone else's data, I'm less fond of.  I won't
say it's outright unethical.  But in a world where use of spotting nets
& packet by single-ops is not permitted, I have a hard time finding a
scenario to justify prefab SCP databases.
-- 
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66



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