[TowerTalk] Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R vs SO1R

[Dale L Martin]

__________________________________________________
>
> Nonsense. WRTC is as serious as it gets and they do NOT go for the max,
> they go for as equal as possible. That's what makes it the premier
> event in contesting - not how many trinkets one has, but how good an
> operator one is. It's what's between the ears, not what's on the desk.

>
>
My view of WRTC is that it evaluates the performance and abilities of
operator teams operating in an as-level-as-possible playing field--as best
as can be achieved given environmental/geographical effects.  The equality
extends only to the physical stations setting the baseline for the
multi-team competition.  The operators go for the max.  It's their ability
and performance that determines which team is number 1, number 2, etc.


73,
dale, kg5u


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


>From k0il at arrl.net" <k0il at arrl.net  Sat Jul 28 15:37:08 2001
From: k0il at arrl.net" <k0il at arrl.net (Ed - K0iL)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:37:08 -0500
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Kudos to CQ WW for Busting Packet Cheaters!
Message-ID: <01C1174D.E1DD9380.k0il at arrl.net>


On Friday, 27 July, 2001 7:56 PM, Tom Osborne [SMTP:w7why at harborside.com] 
wrote:
> > Lets put it this way - the LAW (rules) should be public and >open for 
debate, as should the methods for ADMINISTRATION of the >law.
>
> For all our talking and debating, I haven't seen anyone who was
> disqualified for cheating come on the reflector and defend
> themselves.  That tells me something.  If I was accused of
> cheating and didn't, I'd be raising all sorts of hell, but
> haven't heard a peep yet.  73
> Tom W7WHY

I disagree Tom.  Not everyone will respond that way.   In fact, I doubt 
many will.  If I were falsely accused of cheating, and especially if it 
were made public, I'd find another aspect of ham radio to occupy my 
contesting weekends or just go for a  bike ride instead.

True Story:
When I was a kid I was falsely accused of breaking the rear window of a car 
because I was stupid enough that when I noticed it (heard pieces popping 
out as I walked by it) I knocked on their front door to let them know 
(warped boy scout training--Do a good deed).  Well, "No good deed goes 
unpunished!" as they say.  I learned early that once accused, it will not 
matter what you say after that, you're guilty no matter what.  After all, 
our prisons are full of guys who will tell you they didn't do it!  They 
were all framed just like O.J.

So knowing that, I'd never operate again in a contest where I've been 
falsely accused of cheating in.  And I'd probably not renew my subscription 
or membership either.  They wouldn't deserve my support.

Given this scenario, pretty soon all you'll have left in the contests are 
those who have never been accused of cheating (yet!) and the "cheats" who 
keep coming back.  You think Sunday's are slow now?!  Well, maybe I'd be 
the only one gone, who knows.

That said, I have nothing to worry about in CQWW; I operated "Assisted" and 
entered my log that way!  What ever happened to the "Honor System"?

73,
de ed -K0iL
Nebraska, USA
Go Lance Armstrong!!!


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


>From k0il at arrl.net" <k0il at arrl.net  Sat Jul 28 16:11:08 2001
From: k0il at arrl.net" <k0il at arrl.net (Ed - K0iL)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:11:08 -0500
Subject: [CQ-Contest] SO2R vs SO1R
Message-ID: <01C1174D.E52AE9C0.k0il at arrl.net>


On Friday, 27 July, 2001 8:13 PM, Tom Osborne [SMTP:w7why at harborside.com] 
wrote:
> The only negative I see is from some posts that some have heard
> stations calling CQ on different bands at the same time.  That is
> definitely a no-no.

Why is this a No-No?  It IS 2 radios, not just 2 Rcvrs.

If CQing on multi-bands is a "no-no" as you say, with some ops operating 
with 2 radios leads one to ask "How would we ever know that's not what 
they're doing?"  It would be similar to an op who is connected to 
packetcluster while in a contest.  He could be seeing the spots; then 
again, he might have "SET/NODX" and "SET/NOANNOUN" and isn't seeing 
anything except WWV reports which he could get via e-mail as well.  How 
could we ever know?

73,
de ed -K0iL


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