[CQ-Contest] CW UBN

[Barry]

There are two ways to solve the 0 point QSO problem:
1. Automatically give zone and country credit for all 0 pt QSOs. For 
example, USA gets credit for USA and zones 3,4 and 5; UA0 gets credit 
for UA9/0 and zones 17, 18, and 19; DL gets credit for DL and zone 14; 
etc.
2. If a N-I-L pattern appears, for example, W3multi was in the log of 15 
other W ops, but 12 of those QSOs aren't in W3multi's log, he should 
be DQed.
Barry W2UP


On 1 Jun 2002 Gary Ferdinand W2CS wrote:

> I'm by far no expert on the history of all this, but my impression is that
> the assumption is made that contesters are prone to exaggerate their logs.
> In the past with paper logs this was very difficult to find.  When it is
> found, the QSO itself and a penalty is extracted.  Yet, situations such as
> yours definitely exist where the victim/perp are reversed and the penalties
> are not.
> 
> Now that most (all for CQ?) logs are submitted electronically, I think it's
> high time to eliminate the penalty points entirely.  Just remove the QSO
> (and mult if it be one) and recompute the score.  Guys in your situation
> will still bemoan why the other guy didn't log you, but at least all you're
> losing is the QSO and not having a penalty lumped on.  Anyone trying to
> benefit by padding the log will of course have their work totally removed.
> Seems fair to me.
> 
> I think the time for the penalty points, appropriate when finding fraud was
> so difficult when paper logs were the norm, to be totally removed.  Let the
> score reduction be computed solely on the basis of the submitted log, less
> QSOs in error.
> 
> One man's opinion, of course :-)
> 
> 73,
> 
> Gary W2CS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cq-contest-admin at contesting.com
> > [mailto:cq-contest-admin at contesting.com]On Behalf Of ww3s
> > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:23 PM
> > To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CW UBN
> >
> >
> > Just reviewed my UBN and as I expected, most of the USA multis I
> > called for
> > the mult did not log me. There has to be a trick to this; I even
> > asked many
> > to please log for the mult. Problem is, not only do I loose the
> > mult, but I
> > lose qso points I never had. Stateside qsos are for mults only,
> > correct? So
> > why when a stateside multi doesn't log me do I loose 6 points per
> > q? Common
> > sense should indicate the big multi didn't call me but rather I
> > called them;
> > the error must be on their end so why do I get points deducted?
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Bob Cox" <K3EST at cqww.com>
> > To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 1:02 PM
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] CW UBN
> >
> >
> > Dear Fellow Contesters,
> >
> > The 2001 CQ WW CW logs and UBN's are available to view at
> > http://www.cqww.com  If you have any questions, please address
> > questions at cqww.com .
> >
> > Please be reminded that the 2002 CQ WW contests will require the cabrillo
> > format. This format allows for the saving of thousands of man-hours by the
> > CQ WW Contest Committee in the adjudication of the logs.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Bob, K3EST
> > CQ WW Director
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> > multipart/alternative
> >   text/plain (text body -- kept)
> >   text/html
> > ---
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

--
Barry Kutner, W2UP              Internet: w2up at mindspring.com
Newtown, PA                     Frankford Radio Club