[CQ-Contest] WRTC Spot/Log Correlation
pokane at ei5di.com
Tue Sep 5 17:28:57 EDT 2006
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kostas SV1DPI" <sv1dpi at otenet.gr>
Firstly, my congratulations to Fabian DJ1YFK for a fine
(and timely) piece of work. There will probably be a
deafening silence on this thread because Fabian has made
many people uneasy. Now they know that we know they
> .. in my opinion. These rules allow cheating, because the
> most people are not serious contesters and want to look for
> a rare dx or a missed band during the contest, so they use
> the clusters and when they send their log forget it or they
> don't know it.
Cheating is cheating at any level - serious contesters or
otherwise. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse.
> .. In my opinion the absolute solution would be no categories,
> free use of clusters.
That's not exactly a constructive suggestion. If you get
spotting or operating assistance from anyone, whether local
or remote, you're no longer single operator - you're
something else. To me, "single-op assisted" is no more than
a weasel term for multi-op. Of course, cluster users may
Let's say, for the moment, there should indeed be "free use
of clusters". Wouldn't it make sense then to have free use
of all available power? After all, the cheaters will run any
power they choose.
Wouldn't you agree that cluster makes a mockery of any
attempts to impose physical restrictions on the boundaries
of contest stations? Therefore, the 500 metre rule should
be abolished. Next, network with friends all over the
country, or the continent, and still pretend to be single-op.
While we're at it, why worry about petty restrictions like
"only one signal at a time". What does it matter if there's
a bit of overlap occasionally?
But why stop with cluster? If we're already getting
spotting help from public cluster networks, what's the
harm in having friends phone you with a few more spots?
Even then, if it's difficult to actually make the QSO,
wouldn't it be great to use EchoLink to get the job done.
Isn't EchoLink an enabling technology developed by radio
amateurs for radio amateurs - just like cluster?
Contesters should be progressive and use all available
modes and technologies, and not depend solely on outmoded
practices like logging QSOs with no help from anyone else
and using RF to do it.
I don't think so! Some contesters still prefer to find
and work stations with no help from anyone else, and use
RF to do it.
The problem with cluster is not how it's used, it's the
technology itself. Cluster relies on a commercial wired
communications infrastructure and, as such, is
incompatible with all that amateur radio represents.
Cluster users may not agree. They often point out how
much more fun contesting can be with cluster - as if that
somehow validates its use.
I have two requests for contest organisers.
1. Retain the SO category as presently understood.
2. Recognise that if not SO, the category must be
some flavour of multi-op - and drop the ambiguous
term "single-op assisted".
More information about the CQ-Contest