[CQ-Contest] Two questions about CQ WW SSB contest logging

[Hank Greeb]

Thanks, Randy:

With all the "snarky, 'holier than thou' folks on this reflector who 
like to split hairs and stand on their high horse of hypocrisy" I 
figured I'd better ask the questions, lest someone accuse me of 
"doctoring" my log and those of two newbies who had difficulty with the 
format of the cabrillo file.

I'm glad to see that you aren't one of those types.  I never figured you 
were, but this sure confirms it.  I'm not expecting a win in overall 
score, not even a win in category, but the contest was fun!

72/73 de n8xx Hg
QRP >99.44% of the time

p.s. If you're serious about "extra points" - if that means you're 
willing to give me about 50 million, it would put me in contention for a 
plaque.  :)

On 10/30/2012 1:20 PM, Randy Thompson K5ZD wrote:
> Let's not get carried away here.
>
> The CQWW rules state:
> "III.13. Post-contest correcting of call signs by using any database,
> recordings or confirming QSO's is not allowed (Rule XII.2 always applies)."
>
> I.e., don't correct calls after the contest.
>
> I paraphrased this during the webinar to:
> - Put your log in Cabrillo format
> - Send it in
>
> We want your log in the proper format.  It makes our job easier and it helps you keep all of the points that you earned.  Helping a new contester get their log submitted earns you some extra karma points.
>
> Remember.  This is supposed to be fun.
>
> Randy, K5ZD
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>> Hank Greeb
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 2:55 AM
>> To: CQ-Contest Reflector
>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Two questions about CQ WW SSB contest logging
>>
>>
>> I admit to making an "after contest" adjustment of my cabrillo file for the recent CQ WW SSB contest.  I wasn't quite "with it" when I started the contest, and gave one fellow a "Zone 5" instead of my "real" Zone 4.  I tried to edit the contact to put zone 5 in the contact line, but didn't see any "CQ Zone" in the "Edit Contact" box.  Since I couldn't change the CQ Zone during the contest, I entered "sent zone 5 instead of zone 4" in the comment field, and after the fact I changed the one log line in my cabrillo file to Zone 5.
>>
>> I now think (but am not sure) that the zone COULD have been changed for this one contact by entering "5" in the "exchange" box, but it wasn't obvious during the heat of the contest.  And, I'll never understand why the "comment" field is in the "Edit contact" pane, but to retrieve the data one must go to VIEW>NOTES (NOT VIEW>COMMENTS).  This resulted in a big puzzle, and a note to my two "Elmers" for N1MM software, who pointed out that "Comments" were labeled "Notes" under the VIEW tab.
>>
>> Should my "after the fact editing" of this one line in the log result in disqualification of my entry, and should an orange or red card be issued?  The rules specifically say I should not massage the log after the fact. My reasoning was that I had the data in the comment or note Field in the  N1MM "raw" log, couldn't figure out how to edit it "on the fly," and I didn't want to penalize the other station for a busted QSO because of my error.
>>
>> ====================
>>
>> The other question involves a newbie who entered the contest using a "non contest" logging programme.  It supposedly made a cabrillo file, but the result did NOT have his zone, nor did it have the received signal report. We managed to "massage" this log with Notepad edit feature, so that it conformed with the cabrillo specs provided by CQWW.
>>
>> Yes, again, the rules say one should NOT edit the file after the contest.
>>
>> The choice was either NOT submit a log, or do this rather massive editing by putting the local zone and the received signal report into the cabrillo file.  We didn't make any "corrections" just added data which was in the original log but did NOT show up when the programme made a "so called" cabrillo file.  I figure that he might be encouraged to see his call amongst the other folks in the CQ Writeup, and we might have another contester amongst this seemingly dying breed of US Hams.  I also encouraged him to try his logging software to make sure it will do the correct cabrillo file prior to entering another context.
>>
>> Comments will be appreciated.
>>
>> 72/73 de n8xx Hg
>> QRP >99.44% of the time