[CQ-Contest] Did I cheat in NAQP CW?

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

In the paper days, we tried to keep paper dupe sheets the best we could and
it was expected that you would re dupe your logs prior to submitting them.
I am very happy that we have crossed that hurdle.  I rarely will look at a
log after the contest unless I have scratched out some notes about some mess
I created that would take too long to fix at the time.  

If I looked at the log and saw I copied VT for K8MR knowing that he has been
in OH for years might make one want to fix something that is perfectly fine.


Looking for obvious fat finger moments is one thing, filling in gaps after
the test is different. 


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or  67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin 



-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Kelly Taylor
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 7:39 AM
To: Shelby Summerville; cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Did I cheat in NAQP CW?

I'm with Lindquist on this one: ham radio contests aren't typing class.
Never were, never should be. As long as it's an honest typo, where it's
clear that the operator did indeed copy correctly but merely typed
incorrectly, changing an O to a zero is fair game.

It's really no different than in the paper days of logging when we would,
while poring over dupe sheets (anyone remember those?) clarify what was
written. We weren't changing what we copied, we were only making sure we
could read it. Nobody claimed then that contesting was an exercise in
penmanship!

73, kelly
ve4xt


On 1/13/10 3:45 AM, "Shelby Summerville" <k4ww at arrl.net> wrote:

> Rick Lindquist, WW3DE wrote; "Regarding post-contest log checking, I 
> don't feel it's "cheating" to proofread all the entries looking for 
> typos and the like - entering "O" when I really meant to enter "0," 
> for example."
> 
> While we are all certainly entitled to our opinions, I strongly disagree!
> All contest's have a specified time frame, and anything done "outside" 
> that specified time frame is cheating. I see absolutely no difference 
> between "proofreading", and using any kind of assistance, post 
> contest, to insure the correctness of ones log? If "listening during 
> off time" is considered operating time, why wouldn't "post contest" 
> editing, be considered operating time?
> 
> "A practice that seems especially prevalent among non-US/VE stations 
> is to set up the logging software to do an online lookup and insert 
> whatever appears as your given name on your license record into their 
> reply. This happens a lot on RTTY, within and outside of contests."
> 
> The ability to use previous contest information, "preset exchange from 
> ADIF", in the current contest, is contained in most contest logging 
> software. If you send in a log, it is in ones best interest to insure 
> that what is sent, is what is copied, rather that what may be 
> contained in the "preset exchange"> The use of a "name" in RTTY 
> contests has a long history, and a "name" database, is maintained by 
> NF4Z. I have no idea where the initial information, for that database, 
> came from? I get called by my real name, in most contests that require 
> a name, which has no bearing or what name I have sent, or what any other
station may have copied?
> 
> C'Ya, Shelby - K4WW
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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