[CQ-Contest] No Account QSOs

[Guy Olinger, K2AV]

Oh, Gee,

I thought we finally had an entry point to making change on that
annoying issue.

As a counter to what you say, Ward, ANY change has some cost across the
board.

Will the existence of logging and log-checking software become the new
permanent reason for never changing the rules in a contest? Given the
ubiquitous PC, we could hide behind that forever.

If that is permanent, then isn't the PERMANENT strategy for coping with
the 3 QSO penalty to post scan and REMOVE ALL QSO's deemed iffy.
Undeserved NIL's to the guy on the other end be d***d. Even if half of
the removed QSO's were good and contained some mults, you still come out
WAY ahead by removing them. If you trust at least 24 hours of
dopey-headed operating to be peak accurate, then leave them in there. I
have a more realistic view of my operating on the second day.

It's not that we don't WANT to be accurate. We DO. It's not that we
don't try our best. We TRY (I know that there's a certain crowd but they
ain't everybody). There isn't a rule on the planet, or any contest
official that can do anything to improve my resolve to get better. It's
at 105%. It's ALWAYS been at 105%. It would have been at 105% with or
without the rules. I LIKE the part about computer contest scoring that
shows me where I missed it. I got pride in what I do. I can see where I
got it right and where I blew it.

BUT UNDERSTAND THIS:   If I logged  SM3EKY ...  THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT I
HEARD.   I ALWAYS send the other guy's call. If he doesn't correct me,
how do I know.

I'VE LOST TOO MANY RUN FREQUENCIES TO HIGHER-POWERED STATIONS BY TRYING
TO GET THE CALL RIGHT ON A STATION QSB IN AND OUT OF THE NOISE, TO BE
ACCUSED OF FILLING IN A MISSING LETTER TO PAD RATE AND NOT HONESTLY
TRYING TO GET IT RIGHT.

So I *****HATE***** that 3Q penalty, and I will never accept it as
needed, justified, or anything useful. I'll go on removing Q's. Give me
a zero point in the Cabrillo to turn the iffy ones into "Check QSO's"
(that's a one QSO check logette) and I'll leave them in there to benefit
the other end of the QSO. It would be interesting to see how many of the
zeroed/removed were actually good QSO's.

Maybe the GENIUS contesters among us can keep up superb accuracy for 48.
We DO have some genius level contesters, you all know who they are. I'm
not grousing about them. It really is fun to listen to one of them work
a pile-up -- it's a thing of beauty.

I would appreciate it, though, if you genius types would not PROJECT
your highly talented skills across the rest of us as REQUIREMENTS. That
IS what you are doing.

THAT is why the 3 point QSO penalty is too high.

Allowing Cabrillo zero-pointing at least allows us to zero-point
anything iffy. If we're willing to admit that a QSO is questionable and
not claim credit, the 3Q penalty should not apply.

Software IS MADE to be changed. Otherwise a bunch of us would be out of
business.

73, y'all

-----------------

Guy Olinger, K2AV
Apex, NC, USA

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ward Silver" <hwardsil at WOLFENET.com>
To: "contest reflector" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 11:20 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] No Account QSOs


>
> I need to back up a bit on a suggestion that I made yesterday
regarding
> changing the logging software and format to incorporate "no count"
QSOs.
>
> While this may be one solution to the discarded or unlogged QSO
problem,
> it's very non-trivial to implement across the playing field.  There is
> likely more bang for the buck to be had in educating and advertising
> beyond the regular competitors.  Let's table the thought of requiring
> everybody to rewrite their software...
>
> Seeing as I write a lot, this might an area in which I can make a real
> contribution as opposed to suggesting a lot of work for others :-)
>
> 73, Ward N0AX
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
>
>


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