[CQ-Contest] Log checking questions
ve4xt at mts.net
Sun Dec 18 17:01:50 EST 2005
The notion that people who make contacts on an amateur radio frequency are
bound by rules of a contest they aren't participating in is amazingly
Contest rules do not supplant or append to radio regulations. They are
merely to govern the actions of those who wish to be considered entrants in
a contest. Those who do not wish to submit to the rules (by submitting a
log) are not bound by any rules other than those governing their licence.
The suggestion that a Cluster-free contest should for that weekend require
everyone on the band to turn off their Cluster connection is both arrogant
Sheesh! We have a bad enough rep among non-contesters as it is for taking
over bands during contests. To think that we should then be allowed to
dictate the terms by which non-contesters can operate on frequencies that
are rightly available to them is mindblowing, to say the least.
Non-contesters use contests for their own purposes, mainly to pad their
award totals. If they get on to work competitors in the Stew, that does not
mean they must follow the contest rules. Contest rules apply only to those
stations submitting a log. Contest organizers have no authority beyond
controlling the activities of entrants.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Tope" <W4EF at dellroy.com>
To: "N7MAL" <N7MAL at CITLINK.NET>; "Barry" <w2up at mindspring.com>
Cc: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Log checking questions
> To: Michael Tope ; Barry
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 10:10 AM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Log checking questions
> Thank you very much for your opinion Mike. You have hi-lited the problem
very well. The rule of the land today is anyone can break/bend any rule as
long as a justification can be dreamed up. You are clearly saying if you are
not officially in the contest you don't need to follow the rules of the
contest. Amazing convoluted logic...
> Here is rule 3 for Stew Perry:
> ""3. Categories: Single operator or multi-operator. Remote or packet
> spotting shall not be used. All transmitting and receiving antennas
> used must be within 100 km of each other.""
> It clearly says no packet spotting, It doesn't say it's OK to spot if you
are not actually in the contest. At some point the contest rules must mean
something. For those who were not aware of the rules several times
announcements were made on the cluster system. Here's just one :
> ""17 Dec w1to (1833Z) : Stew Perry rules don't allow packet""
> Maybe 1 or 2 of the guys didn't know the rules of the contest but guys
like K1TTT, who was probably the worst offender, is very well aware. K1TTT
has made it very clear, on this mailing list, he will not, and does not,
support any effort to stop/curtail spots in any contest, obviously including
contests that specifically don't even allow spotting.
> There is obviously no solution to this as long as guys make lame, yes
lame, excuses and other guys blatantly, with malice, thumb their noses at
> MAL N7MAL
> BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
> Sorry, Mal, but the word "Categories" that prefaces the no packet
> spotting rule implies people who are entering the contest. How can
> you be a cheater if you don't enter the contest? Please explain that
> one to me? If non-entrants use packet how does that effect the integrity
> of the contest? I think your logic is the convoluted logic, Mal. Even the
> FCC doesn't have the authority to tell people not to use telnet (well at
> least in the context of part 97). Shutting down the packet networks
> won''t magically create people with integrity. I have entered 6 contests
> this fall season. Four of those have been as a single operator. When I
> was single-op, solving the packet problem was easy. I just turned it
> off (and left it off) before I started operating. What is so hard about
> that? The subtext of your of your rail on packet in contests is that
> anyone who disagrees with you is a low-life cheater.
> And, by the way, you are right. I am clearly saying that if you are not
> officially in a contest, then you don't need to follow the rules of the
> contest. Why would you? If I am not sending in a log for a contest
> with mandatory off-time, why would I need to take off time. I am not
> competing with anyone. I am just a ham radio operator making QSOs.
> If the contest rules state that I must run 100 watts (NAQP) to "enter"
> the contest, then why would I need to run 100 watts if I am just handing
> out QSOs. Read the rules. It doesn't say that you can only work
> people who are running 100 watts, it says that as a competitor you
> have to run no more than 100 watts to comply with the rules of the
> contest. When I "enter" the contest, I submit a score and by doing so,
> I implicity (and sometimes explicity) certify that I have followed ALL the
> rules of the contest that are applicable to my the category. If that is
> not true, then I am a CHEATER and I should be subject to
> disqualification. It is very simple.
> I think it is fine that the Stew Perry sponsors have disallowed packet in
> the rules for both single-operator and multi-operator. Interpretation -
> if you want to enter the contest, don't use spotting. If you are Joe DXer
> and you see that ZL3IX has been spotted on 1825 KHz and you need
> him for a new DXCC country on 160. Go work him. You get a new DXCC
> country and he gets a couple of points. Just don't submit a log for the
> Stew Perry, because by using packet you have just disqualified yourself
> from entering the competition.
> Flame suite ready, Mal.
> Mike, W4EF......................................................
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest