[CQ-Contest] Shut down the clusters during a contest. SImple.

[Sandy Taylor]

This would certainly solve the problem of cheating, however...

There are classes where it is legal to use spotting for contests.

Also, these clusters don't serve contesters exclusively. A large part of
their... business, if you will, is serving the casual op and hard-core DXer
looking for new countries. Contests give these folk fertile ground to go
country hunting, so what incentive would a cluster operator have in turning
off their product at exactly the same time their customers are looking for
it the most?

The other concern is: how could you be certain you got them all?

73,
Kelly
Ve4xt

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Dick-w0raa
Sent: December-13-07 9:52 AM
To: cq-contesting
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Shut down the clusters during a contest. SImple.

Has anybody given thought to asking the people who own/operate the various 
clusters, to voluntarily shut them down during contest periods?  What did we

do before there were clusters and packet?  We fouind stations to work, the 
old fashioned way.  We turned the knob and looked for them.  God forbid we 
should have to do that today.  What a horrible thought.

So, why not just get all of them to voluntarily turn them off at the onset 
of a contest and then turn them back on at the end of the contest?  I think 
it's doable, so why not do it?  Then we'd find out if these big gun winners 
are as big gunned as they claim to be.  It's certainly worth considering.

Also, all contests should be limited to 100 watts.  Now there's where the 
cheating would go.  Cheaters would be saying: "Me, more than 100 watts? Not 
me, I follow the rules!"

Dick
W0RAA

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Fatchett W0MU" <w0mu at w0mu.com>
To: "Randy Thompson" <k5zd at charter.net>; "Untitled" 
<cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet


> Assisted seems to have less competitors which translates to higher
> finishes...
>
> I most cases if you are chasing spots you are probably not winning.  Run 
> run
> run run run.
>
>
> On 12/12/07 4:37 PM, "Randy Thompson" <k5zd at charter.net> wrote:
>
>> Because some of us still like to do things the old fashioned way.  All by
>> ourselves!  And we like the fact that we can compete in a category with
>> other people who feel the same way.  Even makes it more fun when we can 
>> beat
>> the packet assisted guys.
>>
>> I am against combining them because I like to be recognized as a guy who
>> knows how to operate.
>>
>> I wouldn't mind if they were combined because then all the SOA guys who
>> think they are competitive will realize that packet does not a winning 
>> score
>> make.
>>
>> Randy, K5ZD
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
>>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Yuri VE3DZ
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 7:08 PM
>>> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
>>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
>>>
>>> I don't like Dx Cluster, but the reality is - like it or not
>>> - almost everyone is using it nowadays, one way or another. I
>>> mean 99.9 % of the HAM stations have the capability of using
>>> Dx Cluster today.
>>> So, why not just allow it for all categories, like it was
>>> done for WAE or Russian DX long time ago?
>>>
>>> What are we afraid of here?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yuri  VE3DZ

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest