[CQ-Contest] Random acts of kindness

[Paul J. Piercey]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Turner
> Sent: December 4, 2006 15:39
> To: David Mueller
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Random acts of kindness
> 
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
> 
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 09:33:30 -0800 (PST), David Mueller  
> <n2nl at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> >An unassisted operator must not solicit for assistance on his run 
> >frequency, key word being "solicit".  That means, no asking "Does 
> >anyone know where the VY1 is?"
> >Doing this very obviously (to me) places that competitor 
> into the multi 
> >or assisted category.
> >
> >Now, lets say someone calls in and tells you that the
> >VY1 is 10KC down the band.  I really don't know why this 
> person would 
> >tell you this unless asked, but lets say he does.  Feel free 
> to go down 
> >and work him - that information was not solicited.
> 
> ------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------
> 
> In the ARRL contests, it does not matter if the info was 
> solicited or not. Quoting from the ARRL White Paper on 
> contest practices:
> 
> "The only time there's a problem with supporting your friends 
> and club members is when actions are taken by an organization 
> or individual to influence the competitive environment to the 
> exclusive advantage of a participating organization or individual."
> 
> The word "solicited" does not appear in the above. If you 
> read the quote carefully, you will see that information fed 
> to you in your example ("10 KC down") is given to you 
> exclusively and does indeed influence the competitive 
> environment. Obviously, you can not stop someone from 
> transmitting, but you can stop yourself from acting on it. 
> Just ignore the info and ask them not to do it again, 
> explaining that you are operating unassisted.
> 
> Other contest sponsors may define it differently, but that's 
> how it is for ARRL sponsored contests.

The passage you've quoted seems to be contrary to what you are proposing.

"The only time" alludes to when a group or individual makes a conscious
affort to skew the results to the advantage of another individual or group.
If I get info from friends or fellow club members on a regular basis during
a contest, then it can be assumed that there is an effort afoot to assist me
and I should declare myself "Assisted". If I get one (or more) comment from
a total stranger during a contest, how does that equate with what the above
mentioned passage is based upon? Unless he's going to continue to give me
info throughout the contest, there's no way you can logically contend that
he is taking actions to influence the competitive environment to my
exclusive advantage; not to mention that anyone listening to him at the same
time he gives me the information is free to avail of that information in due
course as well, eliminating my exclusivity. Moreover, if he gives info to
many contestants, then your theory is moot because he is no longer trying to
bolster just me, unless he's only feeding info to members of my group, if I
had one.

I agree that technically it can be deemed assistance if you avail of the
information but, in all practicality, it really isn't unless there is a
coordinated effort on the part of the one getting or the one receiving (or
both) the information. That appears to be why contest rules single out
spotting networks as the method of assistance. The use of these networks
represents a concerted effort on the part of both parties to get and give
help. It would be interesting if no one posted any spots to the cluster
during a contest.

I just think you're reading way too much into this.

73 -- Paul VO1HE