[CQ-Contest] Log checking questions

Dave Pascoe davekm3t at gmail.com
Fri Dec 16 08:18:24 EST 2005

On 12/16/05, Barry <w2up at mindspring.com> wrote:
> First, an issue of semantics.  I don't use packet.  I use telnet. Not
> many use packet any more...

Yes, semantics...it isn't telnet that you're using, it's DX spotting. 
:-)  Telnet is an application that runs over the network and is used
for more than just DX spotting.  But you're right...I wonder how many
newcomers even know what packet is!

> Second, to the issue at hand.
> Mark - if all single ops were permitted to use DX spotting assistance,
> how would that hurt you?  You call it a crutch.  That implies an
> impairment.  Perhaps you're correct, as year after year, most top ten SO
> scores are higher than SOA scores.  If the SOs score higher, how would
> "packet" use harm your effort?

It isn't *always* the case that SOs score higher.  It just frequently
works out that way.  The reasons are many, varied, and not relevant to
this discussion.

> There's no way the DX spotting network could or should be disabled for a
> contest.  It stimulates activity by the casual op, looking to make a few
> QSOs or pick up a few new band-countries, etc.  It's the casual ops that
> make the big contests what they are.  Do you really want CQWW to become
> a contest with participation similar to a Sprint - with only a core
> group of regulars?

This is certainly a good point, Barry, and those of us who care about
keeping the "assisted" class separate realize that DX spotting has
been here for a long time now and won't be going away.  But keeping
the categories separate doesn't impact the casual op in the least.  If
they're interested in contesting they will still get on.  If they're
not, for whatever reason, they won't.  I think the reasons people
choose to get on or not are more related to personal issues: family
and/or work obligations, lack of interest due to sunspot decline, etc.

What is more central to this whole argument isn't the competitve
angle, rather it's one of the fundamental parts of a radio contest:
copying callsigns.  We espouse the basics in every other form of
education: reading, writing, math, science, etc.  As we distract our
young with more and more "cool" things, we continue to see their
performance at the basics decline.  And, as a result, we mortgage our
future.  No doubt some of those "cool" things have value, but in the
end everything boils down to basics.  The same is true of contesting.

So, until we have a solid core of operators on the air who can copy
information accurately, we will have problems that hurt everyone who
plays in the game.  Not only that, but first and foremost we're
supposed to be emergency communicators who know how to relay
information accurately!

Dave KM3T

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list