[CQ-Contest] Lightning strikes N5OT

[steve.root at culligan4water.com]

Mark,
You make some good points and I can see your arguments. But with all respect
lets look at the other side of this. Unless you have a very good reason to think 
otherwise, I'd assume that you'd respect my effort as being honest and following 
the rules. I don't think I should have my integrity questioned just because I 
participated in a contest and submitted a score.

If we assume everyone is cheating, this stops being fun right now. 

I suggest that any question about the truth and accuracy of my log is between me, 
my concience, and the log checkers.

3830 is something people "do" because it's fun. It's like standing around on the dock 
and talking fishing with other guys coming off the lake. I enjoy reading the comments
and hearing about other people's experiences. After a short intense period of 
relatively impersonal contesting, it's nice to hear something other than 5903.

The place to address cheating is with the contest sponsors and their log checkers,
not 3830.

73 Steve K0SR

P.S. As I watch Gustav come on shore I've got my fingers crossed for friends in 5 land. 
You're all in our thoughts today. 
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Beckwith [mailto:n5ot at n5ot.com]
Sent: Monday, September 1, 2008 08:39 AM
To: CQ-Contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Lightning strikes N5OT

Gentlemen (and ladies?), Excellent comments. I painted with too broad a brush and as a result need to engage in a little backpedaling, my bad. Some of you have invested your contesting lifetimes in earning a widespread reputation of unquestionable integrity. You should relax, this conversation is not really about you. Some of you are not contenders. You should probably relax too. G4MKP remarked: > Blimey, some of you US guys really > do want to control everything My dear chap: Don't get your knickers in a wad. It's not about control. K6LA asked: > How long do I have before you > raise your eyebrows at my > integrity for a belated post > to 3830? I would not judge a competitor without first making an effort to learn as much as I could about that particular competitor's situation. If a competitor was conspicuously absent from 3830, the question mark floating over my head would be tempered by whatever relationship experience I have with that competitor. If I had none, I would not jump to conclusions without making an attempt to get some. Take Ken, for instance. I go back a long way with Ken. If he didn't post to 3830 in a timely fashion, (which I believe he always does, BTW), I might just ask him "why?," and he might say "my mother died" or "I was arrested trying to get all my gear back into the country, and only just got out of jail." Then I would feel bad for even asking. But then, if he said "really, I just haven't gotten around to it," I might engage in a well-deserved and good-natured razzing. > What kind of royal razzing would follow? Well Ken, since you asked, I might say "get off your ass, you lazy deadbeat" and then buy you another beer. Both would be deserved. Or take my friend Jim, N6TJ (who gave me a great ration about my post privately). Let's say we had competed against each other recently, but he hadn't shared his score and everyone one else had. Now Jim is one of my best pals in contesting, but if he didn't have a good excuse for not posting his score, That would definitely call for a good-natured razzing. And definitely also another beer. And yes, I would even buy the notorious W3WN a beer and maybe we could get to know each other better. Perhaps the problem is, I left the words "good-natured" out of my first post. Oops. Sorry. My bad again. Then Ken asked a very important question (N4VI, KK6MC, K5GU take note): > And why? Two already-exhaustively-debated reasons: 1. Post-Contest Log Massaging 2. Category Shopping Both are bad, wrong, unsportsmanlike. Unfortunately, neither are technically against the rules, and both are not uncommon practices. The only way we as contesters have to defend ourselves against these slovenly practices is to resort to something called "peer pressure" (does that answer your question, Jim?). The possibility that someone may have done one or both of these unsavory things is proportional to the amount of time between the end of the contest and stating on the public record how they did in what category (i.e. 3830, as K9GY correctly identified as the de facto current standard claimed scores listing). Now I AM NOT SAYING that if you don't go on record with your score that you're automatically a jerk. Basically if you go on record early, you are banking some credibility because it will be a lot harder for you to massage your log and go unnoticed, or switch categories just to come in first place in a category you technically didn't operate, but also technically qualify to enter... ...which to me are good reasons to post to 3830 as soon as you reasonably can. Mark, N5OT _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest at contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest