[CQ-Contest] Assisted - still trying to get it right

[Kelly Taylor]

Hi Steve,

I think it's important to take the WHOLE of what Tree said, not just bits of 
it.

First off, he said a pattern of the circumstances COMBINE to suggest 
cheating. But he also said that it only SUGGESTS cheating, it isn't hard and 
fast proof.

Be that as it may, putting a busted spot in your log very close to the time 
the spot is made is certainly pretty damning.

73, kelly
ve4xt
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <steve.root at culligan4water.com>
To: "Tree" <tree at kkn.net>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Assisted - still trying to get it right


> Tree said:
>
> "There are other indicators - like what is the frequency profile of the
> QSOs. For example, if the frequencies are jumping around instead of
> monotonic - it could be an indicator that something is up."
> Let's be very careful here. Last weekend I didn't "first call' very many 
> stations with the second radio. I would make note of where they were and 
> come back when propagation was more favorable. I'd hop all over the place 
> calling these guys. How would this be distinguishable from a spot chaser 
> jumping all over a band? In addition, I live in Minnesota. The DX I can 
> hear is going to be spotted, and spotted often. There's a very good chance 
> that I am going to work a station near the time it gets spotted. How can 
> you prove that I was using the Cluster? Or more importantly, how could I 
> possibly prove I wasn't? These "indicators" have to take into account 
> operating styles as well as QTH.
> 73 Steve K0SR
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest