No subject

[Hans - K0HB]

Society
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: sdelling at facstaff.wisc.edu
CC: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Super-duper-pooper check database function of TR,
etc.
References: <199905071547.IAA28453 at user2.teleport.com>
<37331EC9.65407B82 at facstaff.wisc.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-cq-contest at contesting.com
Precedence: bulk
X-List-Info: http://www.contesting.com/cq-contest-faq.html
X-Sponsor: W4AN, KM3T, N5KO & AD1C


Scott Ellington wrote:

> I think SCP can reduce the number of broken calls if it is used for
> verification, not guessing.  When a call fails to show up in SCP, I 
> make even more effort to be sure I copied it right.  One could use 
> an exchange data base in a similar way, if the logging software 
> allowed it to be done efficiently.

> For example, you might have to enter the whole exchange, but get a 
> message if anything differs from the data base.

I think this is a strikingly bad idea.  SCP and other "computerized
aids to verification" ought to be banned.  In my mind, the only 
valid use of computer logging ought to be verbatim transcription of 
the information which the operator has copied off the air, and post
contest paperwork.

Features such as verifying validity of an entry, 'computing'
zones from call prefixes, and other program-provided assistance
violates the spirit of "my skill against their skill".

73, de Hans, K0HB

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