[CQ-Contest] Throwing the Baby Out With the Bathwater

Jukka Klemola jpklemola at gmail.com
Thu Mar 17 00:28:32 PDT 2011

The most interesting part in all this is there have been no top-tier
contesters commenting negatively about the RDXC decisions.

That tells me they either are complaining using personal messages or they
are happy about the rule refinements.

My bet is they are happy - despite all new stricter rules are for them.

The typical contest entrants can act exactly as they have been doing before.
Personally, I am happy about the fine tuning of the rules for the normal
entrants being more allowing than for the more serious entrants.

The normal entrants are those who are active for less than 23:45 hours out
of the 23:59.
Majority of the normal entrants are active for less than 11 hours.

Jukka OH6LI

2011/3/17 David Gilbert <xdavid at cis-broadband.com>

> I fail to understand all this animosity toward contests sponsors that
> are simply trying to clean up their events.  If you don't believe there
> is a lot of cheating going on you have to be living in a cave.  What
> would you have the RXDC do?  They know cheating is going on and we've
> all seen serious competitors complain about it.  Do you want the RDXC to
> just put their head in the sand like the ARRL mostly does?  The RXDC has
> clearly limited the more draconian requirements to the best of their
> ability and they've tried to leave the rest of us as unaffected as
> possible, even though I'd wager my IRA that a lot of cheating is going
> on at all levels.  The rest of us are probably less emotionally invested
> in whether we finish 15th vs 16th, or 83rd vs 82nd, but the folks
> fighting for #1 probably care a ton whether the guy who beat them was
> cheating or not.
> So tell  me ... what would you do if you were on the RXDC?  Try to put
> yourself in their position and come up with something better than just
> sniping at them.
> Dave   AB7E
> On 3/16/2011 6:43 PM, Warren C. Stankiewicz wrote:
> > Clearly, the rules as stated for RXDC do not go far enough.
> >
> > At the minimum, we should administer polygraph tests to everyone
> finishing
> > in the top 15 in any category;
> >
> > And anyone in any top 5 should be forced to spend time in Lefortovo or
> > Guantanamo (depending on the contest sponsor) until they reveal every
> last
> > contesting secret and detail they may have. I'm sure there are plenty of
> > people out of that line of work who would be willing to offer their
> talents
> > of persuasion for such a task.
> >
> > I think of the great line Dave Newkirk once had, "They died that we might
> > DX." We're not there yet, but it's getting uncomfortably close.
> >
> > Friends, if there truly is this much cheating going on in amateur radio
> > contesting, then the hobby is irretrievably lost. Let us stop focusing on
> > the few (or the one) who might win, and on those who only operate to make
> a
> > few contacts--without them, there's no contest at all.
> >
> > With malice towards none,
> >
> > Warren, NF1J/6
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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