[CQ-Contest] Determining ASSISTED vs NON-ASSISTED -- was: =>RE: Cheating and bad journalism

[Collins, Graham]

Good day all,

I am not singling Mark out but I am using a snippet of his email (see below) as an example of a number of similar comments I have heard or read on this subject.

DX clusters, spotting, packet (whatever the form) is just another tool that some choose to use and others not. I don't now nor for the foreseeable future will I operate ASSISTED in a contest. That is my personal choice.

I have for a very long time been contemplating on how you can determine whether someone has used ASSISTANCE by scrutinizing their log. The simple relationship of a "SPOT" for station XYZ at time X and an entry in competitors log Y minutes later is at best circumstantial. Even if the only contacts that competitor made where always some minutes after a "SPOT" for those stations appeared it would still be circumstantial; suspicious perhaps but not incontrovertible proof of using ASSISTANCE. Perhaps in a multi/multi operation it might be even more suspicious and more the likely but still absolute proof.

I am sure this topic has been discussed before (ad nauseam) and there must be some documentation of some sort by Contest organizers that state their position and methodology in making such determinations but I have been unsuccessful in finding same. Does anyone have any pointers to such documents or discussions?

CQ has been conducting a survey of late and one of their questions has to do with the idea of combing ASSISTED and NON-ASSISTED into one category. I take this as a sign that it is very difficult to police this particular rule; difficult to the point of being near impossible.

Seems to me that ASSISTED or NOT-ASSISTED is splitting hairs - some choose to use a tool and others not, much the same as some choose to log on a computer and others on paper. Perhaps there needs to be categories for "COMPUTER LOGGED" and another for "PAPER LOGGED"; after all, those that choose to log on a computer have an unfair advantage over those that choose to log on paper.


Cheers, Graham ve3gtc



-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mark Luhrman
Sent: September 21, 2011 17:06
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Cheating and bad journalism

<much clipped>

On several occasions while I was using packet in the assisted category, I saw hams sometimes jump on these spots within 2 mins. After I spotted the stations. And then later claim unassisted. 

<much clipped>