[CQ-Contest] Self spotting rationale

Fri Jul 31 06:22:28 PDT 2009

Add a couple more things... the cluster software varies by node.  Some nodes
automatically filter out spots where the spotter and spottee are the same,
that would force self-spotters to use a different call to spot themselves to
reach all nodes.  Many nodes also drop spots for the same station on or near
the same frequency within so many minutes, usually 5 to 15 minutes and some
small tuning range, this limits the number of duplicate spots that are
useful and essentially caps the spotting rate for any one station.  There
are also still some slow links in the network, so very high spotting rates
even now during contests back up certain connections causing their spots to
be dropped due to age limitations, i think most nodes will not process a
spot that is too old.  And then of course there are the self appointed dx
spotting cops who will harass anyone who spots themselves, in a contest or
not, or who make too many spots for 'common' stuff, which most self spotters
would likely be since rare stations get spotted enough anyway.

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: Robert Chudek - K0RC [mailto:k0rc at citlink.net]
> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 17:28
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Self spotting rationale
> Art, K3KU said:
> "Packet, Skimmer, Call History Databases, Dueling CQ's...  C**p!!  Who
> needs musicians, Martha?  Just wind up the player piano!"
> KØRC says:
> "But there's a strong market for both manual and player pianos. Why would
> anyone buying a manual piano want to "judge" how the player piano should
> operate? Isn't that why there is both assisted and unassisted contest
> categories in the first place?"
> Doug, KR2Q said:
> "If I want to test the waters on 10 meters (whether I'm qrp or a big M/M),
> wouldn't it be far
> more "efficient" for me to simply spot myself?  That is not the basis of
> contesting.  If you
> can be "loud" and gather a crowd and some of them happen to spot you,
> fine.  But initiating
> it yourself?  Totally different."
> KØRC says:
> "Absolutely it would be far more efficient to simply spot yourself. I
> thought creating separate categories WAS to define several different
> 'basis for contesting.' Why would you, as an unassisted participant, care
> whether an assisted operator could spot themselves or not? As you state,
> assisted and non-assisted are totally different."
> Yuri, K3Bu said:
> "Besides, wouldn't it be "fun" if everyone spotted themselves? Talking
> about overload. Maybe we do not need radios, just click on internet or
> have skimmer and clicker do it for us?"
> KØRC says:
> "I seriously doubt you could overload the internet. Terabytes of data are
> transported worldwide ever second. Granted, some of the spotting network
> nodes may need to be 'supercharged', but the software tools are already in
> place that eliminates duplicate spots, regions, call areas, etc.
> "Isn't the basic idea of the spotting network to alert the assisted
> contesters 'who's on and where'? My basic question remains, why are we
> putting artificial limits on generating this information? Why do you care
> who creates the spot in the first place? These arcane rules are creating
> additional consternation about 'cheating.'
> Mike, N3LI said:
> "In addition, the DX clusters are there for DX'ers. That they get hijacked
> by contesters is one thing, but when we talk about posting  bogus info, or
> to bring them down, that's not a good thing.
> KØRC says:
> "WHY does this myth continue to be perpetuated? The original DXCluster
> software was created by contesters (Dick Newell - AK1A, et. al.) to help
> contesters during contests. It had nothing to do with casual, daily DXing.
> I know first hand because I ran one of the original 3 networked contest
> nodes in the Minneapolis, MN area. I still have the license, software
> disks, SysOp manual, TNC's and hardware from those purchases."
> Nobody said:
> "What about the new Xtreme category?"
> KØRC says:
> "I'm so glad you asked! Maybe this is the category to first allow self-
> spotting to 'see how it goes', along with all the other innovative
> technology advancements.
> "But my basic question remains unanswered. WHY, if the spotting network
> can be used in (most) assisted categories, can't a station advertise they
> are on a particular band and mode - looking for contacts. The recipients
> of the spots STILL need a receiver to actually hear the signal and
> exchange a contest report in both directions on the airwaves. This has
> nothing to do with "Internet Contesting," which is a completely different
> topic.
> "I am still not convinced there is a logical, rational reason why you
> cannot self spot in the assisted category during a contest. And as another
> group member pointed out, self-spotting brings the wrath from some network
> users even during non-contesting times."
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
> _______________________________________________
> 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