[CQ-Contest] Spotting AD Nauseum

[DL8MBS]

Martin Monsalvo, LU5DX wrote:

>The parallel argument does not work at all. QRP is plenty of honest people. Not so the Low power categories, but well, that should be another problem to be taken care of.
>  
>
IMHO the comparison between power- and cluster-categories is perfectly 
valid. One of the standard arguments for abolishong 
unassisted-categories is "Cheating with cluster/packet cannot be 
proven". That sounds like double standards in comparison to continuing 
power categories - which are completely out of any reasonable control 
and only up to operator´s honesty. It is less difficult to chase 
cluster-cheating (see DJ1YFK´s recent statistics) than to prove 
power-cheating.
But of course organizers are free (and perhaps forced) to do what is 
more popular: allowing casual and competetive participants assistance by 
others via cluster/packet (and relieve the otherwise necessary strain 
for their VFO-tuning finger) and at the same time keeping up with the 
popular LP-categories. It may be justified with a supposed bigger impact 
of power than with that of external assistance. But arguments based on 
chances to prevent cheating sound more like: "We can´t nail those 
power-cheaters (and there also qrp-results making one think a lot), so 
we do want to nail those packet-cheaters. Seems like there is no easy 
escape from the mild shizophrenia of a competition (it´s called contest 
not activity weekend) based more or less on the assumption of honesty.

73, Chris

(www.dl8mbs.de)