[CQ-Contest] Log checking questions..Did they cheat?

[Robert Pack (NX5M)]

I think it might be time to just do away with the packet assisted category
and let everyone do whatever they want.  You either have it or you dont and
if you dont have it you need to find a way to get it if you want to keep up
with the other guys.
In some contests using packet makes you a multi.  Others, it is just
assisted.  But with all the tools available today it is just too easy to
take a peek even when not supposed to.  Anyone doing contesting seriously is
likely to have the capability to get packet spots.

Bob

----- Original Message -----
From: <Cqtestk4xs at aol.com>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 8:48 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Log checking questions..Did they cheat?


> It APPEARS like we have a bunch of cheaters who are claiming to be
> unassisted, but are using packet.  It also is a possibility, but not a
probability, that
> one of the guys who worked the XY8Z repeated the call as he worked him and
> the others assumed it was it was correct, especially if the guy was P
weak.  Is
> this for real, or hypothetical?  I know the call is bogus, but is the
> situation?
>
> I suppose we need to ask ourselves, how much circumstantial evidence is
> enough to bust a guy, especially if he is well known and respected.  This
would be
> something for an Ethics 101 class.
>
> Bill K4XS
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>