[CQ-Contest] W2SC's ARRL DX LCR feedback
John Laney
k4bai at worldnet.att.net
Wed Sep 17 14:54:15 EDT 2003
It seems to me that this might be the next most important thing for
logcheckers to try to get right. I understand that this problem does
not exist for all contests. If I understand correctly, the CQ Contest
Committee has real people who look at what the computer has done and
think about it and don't allow disqualification of QSOs that are
correctly logged. But, the ARRL is interested in having it all done
automatically. So, it must be accepted as the computer spits it out.
No real person has looked at the results or thought about whether a
particular QSO or group of QSOs should be discarded.
The message from ARRL appears to be: Figure out what the logchecking
software is looking for and log everything that way even if that is not
what was sent to you in the contest. If you don't do that, you may lose
points and perhaps multipliers. So, the reward here is not for accuracy
in logging, but for understanding the results of the logchecking program
and changing the logged information from what was sent to what PERHAPS
should have been sent. That is not the message that I think we should
be sending.
However, I will play by the rules if I can understand them. They should
be clearly stated in every publication of contest rules. In addition to
saying that the callsign sent must reflect the DXCC country operated
from, they should say that, if credit is to be claimed for stations who
are not abiding by the previous rule, the station should be logged as if
he had complied with the rule using "old standard" prefixes (see
paragraph below in this regard).
The present system appears to penalize those who abide by the rules by
logging what was sent to them. I assume it does not penalize the rules
violator, such as KH6xx and others, who don't follow the identification
rule. In a perfect world, I'd think the station who does not identify
in accorance with the contest rule (although perhaps legally identifying
according to FCC or other governmental rules) would be "found out" and
disqualified, but those who made legal contact with the rule offender
and logged the information sent should be given credit for the contact
and the multiplier where the station was eventually determined to be
located.
Actually, I am not really in favor of disqualifying for most rule
violations, since I do not want to discourage participation in contests.
But it is hard to believe that KH6xx and a few other are not
deliberately and knowingly ignoring the ARRL contest rules. Some of the
others may just be casual operators who don't even know what the rule
is. I think contacts with them should count and there should be some
contest software or real thinking person involved in log adjudication
that would make any necessary adjustments (such as what has been often
done for "unstable logs").
To get back to Tom's original question, it seems likely that from a
governmental rule standpoint, the AH2 or NH2 station in the continental
USA is probably legally identifying. After all, how long did W0RTT
operate from the US with his old call of AH3C with no portable
identificator? As I understand it, there is no governmental requirement
of signing portable with an FCC-issued license in any QTH in which
licenses may be issued by the FCC.
So, every W#xxx who is in Puerto Rico need not sign portable anything,
but if we want credit for a QSO and multiplier in certain contests, we
must artifically add /KP4 or /NP4 or /WP4 or /KP3 or ....? How do we
know what portable designator to use if the station doesn't use one? If
we are to get credit and log something that isn't being sent, I suggest
we use the "old standard" prefixes, such as KP4, KH6, KL7, W#, etc.
I appreciate everything the logcheckers, especially Tree, have done to
make logchecking better. I have always told him that I think a real
person needs to think about disqualification of QSOs and multipliers
before they are actually allowed. Apparently the CQ contest conmmittee
has the manpower to do that. Apparently the ARRL volunteers do not.
Wishing all a good contest season, many QSOs, and a minimum of lost
points that are not actually errors on your part.
73,
John, K4BAI.
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list