[CQ-Contest] What should I do?

Mark Steven Williams k9gx at n4gn.com
Fri Dec 23 14:55:40 EST 2005

I wholeheartedly concur with Mike's opinion here. Anyone "sophisticated" 
enough to put together a multiop station who knows the exchange format knows 
the rules. If this was the case DQ the station (and I'm not talkin' Dairy 
Queen) and make an example of them.

Mark S. Williams
Elizabeth, IN
k9gx at n4gn.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Tope" <W4EF at dellroy.com>
To: "Randy Thompson" <k5zd at charter.net>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 5:09 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] What should I do?

> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Randy Thompson" <k5zd at charter.net>
>> >From the ARRL Sweepstakes rules:
>> 3.2. Multioperator:
>> 3.2.1. Multi-Single only:
>> Only 1 transmitted signal is permitted at any time.
>> During the SS Phone contest, I called a station and he proceeded to give
>> me
>> the exchange.  As he was talking, I can hear another voice in the
>> background
>> also saying an exchange.  I notice that both of them give the same 
>> number.
>> Then just before the op turns it over to me, he stops and corrects the
>> serial number to one higher.  It's pretty obvious to me that they are
>> transmitting the exchange on two bands at the same time.
>> What is the process that one should follow to report something like this?
>> Do I write the station owner?  Do I write to the contest sponsor?  I 
>> don't
>> have this recorded. Why should the contest sponsor believe me?  What
>> should
>> the sponsor do with my report?
> Randy,
> Here is what I think should happen:
> 1). You contact the ARRL contest desk and report your allegations.
> 2). The ARRL contest desk opens an inquiry into the allegations.
> 3). The ARRL sends a letter to the accused station owner outlining
> the alleged wrongdoing and stating that their entry has been suspended
> until the matter can be resolved. The letter requests a formal written
> response within 30 days of receipt in which the accused station owner
> is asked to respond to the charges.
> 4). If the accused station owner does not respond to the allegations
> within the time period specified, the entry is disqualified.
> 5). If the station owner provides a complete response (this is where it
> gets hard), then the contest desk must then decide whether the charges
> are substantiated. The bar should probably be set pretty high here
> with weight given to the any past allegations and the number of people
> who have reported wrongdoing (e.g. multiple reports given much
> more weight than a single report).
> This sounds like a clear case of cheating. Pushing the envelope for
> maximum advantage while still fully and completely complying with
> the one transmitter rule in the SS multi-op category takes both
> operator teamwork and some technical finesse. Those who take blatant
> shortcuts like the one you describe don't deserve to have their score
> listed with those who play it straight.
> 73, Mike W4EF....................
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list