[CQ-Contest] Cheating as a moral issue

[Bill Parry]

Frankly I am really tired of this topic.  The idea that cheaters are hiding
behind every tree is not something that I want to talk about.  This seems to
be the favorite topic of a very small highly selected group that frequent
this reflector. 

If the contest sponsors (CQ for example) want to stop cheating, they should
make the punishment so bad that no one would do it.  Like ban that person
from contesting for life on all the CQ contests. Give them the death penalty
or something.  A few years ago when we got into this mindset I decided to
stop sending in my logs. I enter them into 3830 and I can see how I did.
This will keep my logs from being involved in the witch-hunt that has become
contesting. (With the exception of the one contest per year that we do a
multi from my station).

Bill W5VX



-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Rick Kiessig
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 4:17 AM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Cheating as a moral issue

My view is that cheating is primarily a moral issue, and that morality
cannot be "legislated." You can't force someone to be moral. Rules won't
make someone more moral. The moral must be chosen; you have to want to be
moral.

 

If a cheater "wins," their victory will be hollow, because, as with all
immoral actions, they will ultimately find it to be unsatisfying, and even
damaging, because they know what they've done, even if no one else does. In
addition, when others do find out about their cheating (as they often do),
that's likely to further diminish the value of the win.

 

Only an honest competitor will truly enjoy the win for the long term.

 

Rules should be enforced, but they should also be enforceable. Yes, some
cheats will slip through, maybe even some "winners." So what? People who
don't care about cheating will continue to do what they do regardless of how
many rules are applied. The rest of us should get on with our lives and not
let the few bad apples spoil this great sport.

 

To reinforce this point, I would like to suggest a move in the opposite
direction from Yuri's recent post: fewer rules all around, not more. Rules
should be enforceable, which means they should be based on what's reported
in logs and maybe some limited (reliable) secondary data. Trying to
legislate things like power levels, assisted vs. not, use of a local
Skimmer, and so on, is just a waste of time and effort.

 

Fewer rules would also make it easier for those of us who are honest to be
more confident that we haven't accidentally broken some rule (for example,
if I left my PC in the other room connected to a cluster, but didn't use it
during the contest, will I be considered by others to be assisted or not?).
If you do have an honest win, why spoil it with some nagging doubt about
whether you fully, absolutely complied with the rules?

 

73, Rick ZL2HAM

 

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest