vr2bg at harts.org.hk
Sat Apr 4 05:23:53 PDT 2009
Brain got way ahead of fingers previously, let me finish & continue
with two other examples from right here on cq-contest. I suggest
reading my previous post (repeated below) before continuing.
It appeared that since the guy who posted this A-P Sprint log on an
Internet forum prior to the log submission deadline had operated the
contest with a different call, when another participant saw the log he
thought he may made a mistake in what he logged for his contact with
the guy who had posted the log, as he didn't see the call of the guy
who posted this log in his own log.
In the end, it was felt from the discussion on this forum that the guy
who thought he may have made an error in logging the contact with the
guy who posted his log had logged the correct call to begin with &
therefore made no changes to his log after seeing the log that was
posted by the guy who he had worked. However, if there had been an
error, the act of posting the log would have made it possible for this guy
to see his error & correct it, therefore it was decided to make it clear to
the guy who posted the log that this was not acceptable behavior.
Now, with that having been explained, let us look at two cases from
here on cq-contest.
Most recently, someone mentioned getting contacted by a guy his
had worked in a contest, the reason for this being that this other guy
realized he had made a mistake by operating on frequencies he was
not allowed to use. So the guy who made the mistake is contacting
who he worked, informing them he was removing these contacts from
his log. This allowed those he worked by mistake to remove the Qs
from their logs & avoid a NIL penalty. Although it is hard to tell for
sure, the guy who worked this guy who had operated where he
shouldn't have removed the Q from his log.
The other case was where someone here made a post asking if a
recent DXpedition he thought he had worked in a contest was actually
working the contest. What the DXpedition apparently was sending to
stations being worked could have been a valid contest exchange, or it
could have been simply RST & "over". Further, this DXpedition had
previously announced that it would not be QRV in this contest, so it is
understandable that the guy with the query wasn't sure if an exchange
had taken place that qualified as a contact in this contest. Several
others replied with information & the matter appeared to have been
settled by someone sharing what they found from looking for the call of
the guy who originally asked in the on-line log of the DXpedition station.
The apparent result was that the guy who originally asked left the Q in
Now I may be wrong, but to me these examples might be a greater
concern to all than the current discussion about momentarily oblivious
Ws who call VEs on frequencies Ws are not allowed to transmit on.
One of these examples is borderline IMHO, but the other was well over
What I am sure of is that if I'm the only one who sees this, then we
have a bit of a problem, as then the issue isn't even seen as an issue.
It certainly goes a long ways towards explaining to me what seems to
be wrong with radiosporting today.
>What I find interesting about this discussion is how apparently
>nobody seemed to notice that this list was used to solicit &
>receive input for some potential post-contest log massaging just
>a little while ago.
>Although it is a minor event - admittedly not up there with, say,
>some state QSO parties - last year we came across some
>post-contest activity on the Internet where an Asia-Pacific
>Sprint log was publicly posted & a potential logging error by
>an entrant could have been corrected before the log submission
>Please folks, set a good example, otherwise discussion of
>ethics here seems a bit hollow.
More information about the CQ-Contest