[CQ-Contest] Ban all contest spotting?

[Jukka Klemola]

...
>> People use packet for various reasons.  Some are looking
>> for new DXCC counters.  Some are trying to maximize the score
>> they contribute to their club.  Some just use it to have fun.
>
> Yes - the use of non amateur-radio communications technologies
> may be quite OK for people who want to have fun, or increase
> their DXCC counters, but it is inappropriate at all times for
> contesters who submit logs.

Banning the internet based spotting tools would ruin many things for
the normal people who do not submit logs.

Read: people submitting logs are abnormal.

People submitting logs with faul play should be a sub category to the
abnormal group described above.


> You've probably heard this one enough too - but sailboat racers
> (SO or MO) don't use engines, ever, during races, even though
> they might have easy access to one - for the simple reason that
> would be a foolish thing to permit in a sailboat race.  I'll
> spell it out - it undermines the rationale for having sailboat
> races in the first place.

Yea.
And there may be a TS-Wires category entrant who actually uses a 2
element tribander.

It is faul play and gives an advantage..


>> I was told recently that some people in a large contest club
>> feel that using packet is frowned upon by the more serious
>> operators in the club.
>
> The more serious operators probably consider themselves to be
> amateur-radio contesters,
>
>> For a club that wants to win their category, I find this
>> shocking!
>
> The fundamentally shocking issue is not just that the use of
> a separate, wired, communications technology is permitted in
> some amateur-radio contesting categories, it's that many of us
> apparently think it's normal.

Not entirely = there is more to it.
The issue is there are guys claiming to be serious contesters who at
the same time openly discourage the club from making best possible
score.

Those guys simply are something else than serious contesters.
They are serious whatever, but not serious contesters.

In sailing races the serious contesters read the rules and maximise
the result by means within the rules - written and spirit of the
rules.

Same applies here.
Serious guys maximise the score using means within the rules.

Less serious guys invent other rules .. those may be more strict or
more 'giving' than the defined-by-contest-sponsor.

Those guys are both in same category.

Bottom line is they twist what contest sponsor set to be the tools and
methods for making a contest score.

They have a conetst of their own.

So be it .. in case a club allows that, the whole club enters some
other contest than what is set by the contest rules.


>> Why shouldn't all club members be encouraged to use whatever
>> legal means is at their disposal to increase their score (and
>> thus the club's core)?
>
> Agreed, and what chance is there of engines becoming legal in
> sailboat races?

Well, there are sailboat contests and there are motorboat contests.

In case the contest is about CQWW type for singleop unassisted can not
use the imaginary 'motor'.
But in RDXC there is no category without this imaginary 'motor'.

In CQWW there are CQWW rules, in WPX there are WPX rules and in RDXC
there are RDXC rules.

As in sailing or motorboat racing .. or why a Tour-de-France cycling
contester should not use a 200cc motor to just a bit boost the bike?

In case taking an example from ham-world, we might ask why using 20m
is not allowed for contest contacts in an 2m EME contest?
The 20m is of older technology, it should be allowed for 2m EME
contest QSO making !



>> I hope casual operators don't take this "packet is lame"
>> stupidity to heart.  Why not "live and let live"?
>
> Agreed - casual operators can do what they like.

There is more to this.
Casual operators know what is their fun.

It is excellent they can enjoy the times there is a contest, by
kind-of entering the contest but not quite walking all the way the
log-submitting straight-players take burden with.


>>  If packet is legal by the rules, and people want to use it,
>>  why not let them instead of calling them names?
>
> There is a bigger question.  Why is packet legal by the rules?
> A reply to the effect "because it's in the rules" is not an
> answer to the question.
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI

There is more to it.
Because the contest organiser has decided to allow packet for the contest.

The contest organisers write the book.
The contest entrants are supposed to play by the book.

In case the book does not fancy the eye of the beholder, enter a
category of your own.
For example I do that sometimes.

I have never used spotting network assistance in RDXC regardless the
fact spotting network usage is allowed in RDXC.

For me it has been more fun to participate on my own, without spotting
network assistance.

For WPX and CQWW I have participated some times in categories allowing
the spotting network.
Even then sometimes we or I have decided not to use the spotting network.
..like some ten years ago or so when I participated CQWW SSB for 21MHz
singleop..
I sent my score as assisted category entry, even though I was unassisted.


Bottom line recipe is:
Rules are set by contest organisers..that is,. contests are set by the
contest organisers.

Define your own circle of fun and have Fun.


73,
Jukka OH6LI