[CQ-Contest] Fwd: Ethics

Fri Apr 3 08:41:23 PDT 2009

I would say the 'more ethical' approach would have been for him to leave the
contact in the log.  After all he did make it, he can't cause it to go away
just by taking it out of the log, in fact in the old days that could have
been construed as falsifying your station log.  Then he should have
submitted the log to the contest sponsor with a note saying that he should
not get credit for the specific contact because he accidentally violated his
license restrictions.  Unfortunately Cabrillo doesn't let you mark contacts
like that as zero points and no multiplier credit like you could do with
paper logs so it would be up to the sponsor to un-score the contact.

David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt at arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Dougherty NQ4I [mailto:nq4i at contesting.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 11:47
> To: CQ Contest
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: Ethics
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Rick Dougherty NQ4I <nq4i at contesting.com>
> Date: Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 7:46 AM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Ethics
> To: sawyered at earthlink.net
> Hi All...this past weekend in WPX SSB, we worked a KB6 2x3 call sign on
> 15m....the qso took place on Friday evening on 15m...on Saturday I
> received
> an email stating that the KB6 station had realized that he had worked us
> and
> he was outside his general class privileges and that he was removing the
> contact from HIS log and suggested that WE DO THE SAME!!!!
> If I did not take his qso out of my log, then he would have been a NIL and
> I
> would have been penalized even more...anyone ever had this before?
> de Rick NQ4I
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 6:01 AM, Edward <sawyered at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > You must be assuming that the log shows frequency data.  In my case, I
> > am using older software that logs all 20M QSOs as 14000.
> >
> > In general, I disagree with the responsibility of the receiving station
> > "having any responsibility" of knowing the "other stations regs". Why
> > pick on VEs as "they should know US regs".  Heck, I don't know VE regs.
> > I have to assume after hearing decades of VEs working staions simplex on
> > 14150 - 14100 and 7100 - 7000 on SSB that they can legally do that, but
> > do I KNOW?  Nope.
> >
> > And what of the last few years when an I or a G or HB9 or whatever has
> > called me on 7188 or even 7225 simplex?  I have no idea whether they can
> > legally call.  All I know (through the grapevine) is that allocations
> > are changing so they must have that ability now.
> >
> > I think it is totally unfair to ask the CQing station doing 100+ an hour
> > to be "hanging out an ethical filter" in the heat of the battle as they
> > log Qs.
> >
> > And contrary to the statement made earlier by someone that this is a
> > 0.1% problem.  It absolutely is not.  I hear dozens of out of band Qs
> > every contest on 40M as stations call simplex on EU stations running
> > split.  I am assuming most are using the cluster to point and shout and
> > not watching what they are doing.but that is just an assumption on my
> > part.
> >
> > Ed  N1UR
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list