[CQ-Contest] Do I need to operate assisted to figure out the calls?

[Pete Smith N4ZR]

What an elegant new call you have, Mats!

As usual, Paul bends every situation to fit his arguments against use of 
the Internet, but also as usual, he goes much too far. I fully support 
the idea of continuing to have a class in each and every contest which 
is completely unassisted. It also makes sense to establish and enforce a 
rule on identification.  Unlike many of our rules, this one will be easy 
to enforce.  There's no reason to mutter about going off and setting up 
a new contest.

73, Pete N4ZR
The World Contest Station Database, at www.conteststations.com
The Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com,
spots at telnet.reversebeacon.net, port 7000 and
arcluster.reversebeacon.net, port 7000

On 7/30/2012 11:19 PM, Mats Strandberg wrote:
> Bob,
>
> As a native speaker of English, you express things more to the point. I
> have no objections with your revised wording. My proposal was not
> elaborated with during a long time in order to create the final wordings.
> The intention is clear in your formulation although I think violations not
> always should render in conversion into checklog entries. Disqualification
> is another variant that should be considered if violations are intentional
> or severe.
>
> 73 de Mats RM2D (ex RA/SM6LRR)
>
> 2012/7/30 Robert Chudek - K0RC <k0rc at citlink.net>
>
>> Specifically, what is the intention of rule #3? What is the "spirit of
>> participation"?
>>
>> If you want to get serious, rule 3# should be:
>>
>> "Breaking other rules will automatically reclassify your entry as a
>> check log." Period.
>>
>> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>   On 7/30/2012 10:48 AM, Mats Strandberg wrote:
>>> Paul,
>>>
>>> Many times I thought there is a golden average between YOUR view and the
>>> view of "the opposition"...
>>>
>>> However, I begin to agree that you become more and more correct.
>>>
>>> Internet-supported contesting in ANY form is a clear deviation from the
>>> classic contesting.
>>>
>>> I tend to think, the only way is to create a parallel worldwide contest
>> to
>>> CQWW. It does not mean that I will boycott CQWW, because I really love
>> this
>>> contest since the past 30 years...
>>>
>>> However, I wish to create a True Classic Contest, where:
>>>
>>> 1. No internet (DX Cluster, Skimmer, whatever) is allowed
>>> 2. Power cheating is 100% DQ reason and against the conscious of the
>>> participant
>>> 3. Breaking other rules is contradictory to the spirit of participation.
>>>
>>> The new contest might be forever SMALLER than any of the major events,
>> BUT
>>> participants will be proud of their achievement and by NOT touching the
>>> borderline between allowed and not allowed.
>>>
>>> Anyone to share my views and to be part of the creation of Gentlemens'
>>> Contest Club and Gentlemens' Worldwide Contest?
>>>
>>> 73 de RM2D (ex RA/SM6LRR), Mats
>>>
>>> 2012/7/30 Paul O'Kane <pokane at ei5di.com>
>>>
>>>> On 29/07/2012 17:43, Mats Strandberg wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> During the IOTA Contest I realized that some stations have become so
>>>>> self-assured that everyone checks the cluster, so the need to ID after
>>>>> contacts has become useless.
>>>> This issue applies to all major contests, not
>>>> just IOTA.  If the stations concerned know that
>>>> most other stations know their callsign from the
>>>> internet, they have no need to identify unless
>>>> they run out of callers.
>>>>
>>>> After all, there is no rule saying you must
>>>> identify after every QSO, or after every 10
>>>> QSOs.  No rule has been broken, so everything
>>>> must be OK.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps a new rule is needed.
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me, however, that non-identification
>>>> is a natural and legitimate consequence of permitting
>>>> the use of non-amateur communications technologies
>>>> in amateur radio contests.
>>>>
>>>> 73,
>>>> Paul EI5DI
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>