[CQ-Contest] SRe: What I want for Christmas

[Jim Neiger]

I appreciate your (many) comments, Mike, but curious to just how serious a 
contester you might be?

I did a quick scan of several of my logs of the past two years, both CW and 
SSB, some all-band, some single band, totalling almost 25,000 QSO's from 
ZD8Z and 9Y4AA, and nary a sign of your call N3LI or your former call 
KB3EIA.  And since I am notoriously easy to work, I guess our paths just 
didn't cross?  Or maybe I need to go listen to my tapes and see if maybe I 
missed you.

Or perhaps you're just 'lobbing the hand grenade' back over the wall?


73,

Jim Neiger  N6TJ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Coslo" <mjc5 at psu.edu>
To: "CQ-Contest at contesting. com" <CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 7:53 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] What I want for Christmas


>
> On Dec 14, 2007, at 8:46 PM, Jim Neiger wrote:
>
>> Holiday Greetings.
>>
>> Since I "lobbed the hand grenade" over the wall, to quote my Uncle,
>> N6AA,
>> its been truly interesting and remarkable to read the many
>> comments, ideas,
>> criticisms, and the personal 'thank you's' from the 99% who thought
>> it a
>> good idea, more or less.  For those who commented about the other
>> 1%,  not
>> to worry, once a jerk, always a jerk.  A real plus  has been the so
>> many
>> comments, from world-wide who never regularly post here.
>>
>> Santa, I'd like to herein make my Christmas Wish List:
>>
>
>
> So Jim, let's say you get everything you want.
>
> It won't stop cheating. I'd go on record as saying that cheating
> will increase. More rules, more opportunities.
>
> What do you propose as new anti-cheating rules after that? I can see
> that you have the beginnings of the new set of demands in asking
> Santa to speak with those who run over legal power.
>
> How about each station having to purchase and use a recording device
> that records time on/time off, band changes, output power, and any
> other possible cheat mechanism on a NIST certified and sealed "black
> box" attached to all needed points at a station.?
>
> Tongue in cheek of course
>
>
> But seriously, when you want to:
>
>> (5) Please consider the notion of everyone wishing to be judged as
>> a Serious
>> competitor, at least audio-tape the contest, and have it available,
>> should
>> the judges request it be mailed in.  Cost of a recorder:  less than
>> $100.
>> duh.
>>
>
>
> You are setting up a two tier system of "serious" and "not serious"
> competitor.
>
> So if I somehow do well, but I didn't think I was a "serious" (could
> you define that anyhow?) do I get DQ'ed if I didn't record myself?"
>
> And if I get DQ'ed:
>
>> (4) Santa, please install a painful penalty for being DQed.  A
>> to-be-determined period in which the culprit cannot participate.
>> Put this
>> penalty into effect immediately, retro-active to this 2007 CQ
>> WW. .  Give
>> each transgresser a 30 day grace period in which to now change the
>> category
>> of the pap they've already submitted, with no penalty.  I think
>> this penalty
>> will go a long way to discourage cheating.
>>
>
>
> So here I am, the improving "non serious" contester who just gets
> penalized, and you apparently want me to suffer painfully. I'm just
> going to participate in the contest next year, eh?
>
> Although you are looking at the situation narrowly (changing
> category), your painful penalties would span the DQ universe.
>
> Your vision of future contesting is quite chilling, Jim. Is a guilty
> until proven innocent system, and it doesn't address one of the most
> important aspects of contesting, in that it is supposed to be fun. As
> such, it is quite regressive.
>
> Of course, if there are less participants, there will be less
> cheating! ;^)
>
>
>
> -73 de Mike N3LI -
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>