[CQ-Contest] Kudos to CQ WW for Busting Packet Cheaters!

[Ward Silver]

> I don't consider the CQWW Committee to be Gods, and I have
> little faith in any procedure that's not open to public scrutiny and
> criticism.
> 
> 73,
>  Jeff Maass K8ND

I kind of understand the philosophy here, but in the case of looking for
cheaters, public detection procedures are an oxymoron.

Lets put it this way - the LAW (rules) should be public and open for
debate, as should the methods for ADMINISTRATION of the law.  But the
methods for DETECTION must of necessity remain masked, except when
required to explain evidence.  If there were a large number of DQ's, then
I would expect that some justification for them would be a good idea, but
this is not the case. 

One must consider also, that this is not a court of law and there are no
particular rights conferred on a participant.  If there is a consensus
among the contesting community that the competition is not being
administered fairly, then the participants should stop supporting it. 
This certainly does not seem to be the case with WW - in fact, quite the
opposite, which I partially attribute to the quality of the log checking. 

73, Ward N0AX


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