[CQ-Contest] Scourges of Contesting, Chapter Two

[jukka.klemola at nokia.com]

I wrote:
> > If showing this information is of interest and
> > somehow gets more people to participate, 
> > this is good..?

Reply to me:
> 
> If showing this information is of interest and
> somehow people use it to affect the fairness of the
> competition, this is good...?

It is used fairly.
I believe over 90% of the entrants use it fairly.
The 2% that do not, will likely get known for doing that.
They could face same kind of treatment as other dishonest
athletes in other sports.

Dishonesty has been our unwanted guest already before
I was born, that is in the early 60's.
Dishonesty will not seas to exist if we would make internet
vanish after I send this email.
Dishonesty continues, unfortunately.
We have better tools to fight dishonesty .. the computers..


Reply to me:
> The DX cluster system probably got a lot of people 
> more interested in contesting, but it has also
> done a lot of serious damage to the sport.

I see first and foremost the benefits.
For the other side of the coin, make the dishonest
people know they did not do the right thing.
Contests have rules and the rules should be followed.
 -computers are used to check the logs more efficiently
  than ever before and many athletes using doping have
  been caught - this is sad, but doping is in all sports

I read from the last CQ the internet spotting only hurts
the score if it is used.
I believe a spotting system could advance the score if
it was used right.

Last week I read here already W3AU used spotting.
That must have been the first or one of the first 
stations ever to do that.
I believe they succeeded with their approach.
Their tool was 2m FM. Now it is packet via FM or a wired
or wireless connection to wherever..


I wrote:
> > Based on the interest the Great Audience showed
> > to the 2002 near-live scoreboard, this will
> > succeed in getting people to be interested in
> > contesting.

Reply: 
> The reason the scoreboard worked at WRTC 2002 was
> that there were anonymous callsigns involved.  Will
> this be done for every contest?

The reason for not showing the callsign and the country
was because WRTC wanted to keep the teams kind of faceless
or anonymous so Russians would not work only the Russian
Team, Finns would not work only the Finnish team or
Germans work only the German Team etc..

That was fair for the WRTC and will be in the future
for such happenings.

In another kind of a contest, where this kind of anonymous-
type approach does not add value to the whole picture,
this should be experimented with more visibility.

I can see the evolution go in the direction it already
has gone for some: web cameras showing live picture
from some RadioRoom full of contest activity, scoring,
comparing of scoring to other stations etc..

I would draw the line so the station cannot solicit contacts
directly on their own web, like show their running frequencies
on the web.
Spotting network is for that.
And, when it is used in good spirit, it is a wonderful tool.

I know some do use spotting to solicit their own station but
only some of those stations have been caught.


This can become a sport that can be watched on the sofa.
Like any football game.
If I stretch the thinking a bit I could say CQWW is only
is a tad longer than the Superbowl.
It is as fast as Indy 500.


I believe the contests allowing this to happen will win
in number of participants.
This is the 21st Century. Meet the challenges of new tools.

Many stations use computer logging.
Many stations use automatic keyers.
Many stations use SSB instead of AM.
Many stations use transitorized radios.
 And so on.


73,
Jukka OH6LI