[CQ-Contest] Cheating as a moral issue

[David Gilbert]

For once ...  ;) ... I have to completely agree with Paul ... amazingly 
on every point he made below.

A "contest" without rules is not a contest at all, and history has shown 
time and time again that people will not participate in any competitive 
activity that they feel is rigged against them.   I might easily go out 
for a hard run with others for the pure enjoyment of it, but no way will 
I enter an organized race that allows other runners to take shortcuts 
without penalty.

For the most part I do not support Yuri's suggestions because they put 
the burden for preventing cheating on those who don't cheat, but turning 
a race into a fun run is not the answer either.

Dave   AB7E




On 9/14/2012 4:07 AM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
> On 14/09/2012 10:17, Rick Kiessig wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> Why, then, are all competitive events governed by
> rules?   Because, without rules, morality would not
> be a factor in the results.
>
>
>> If a cheater "wins," their victory will be hollow,
>
> Cheaters are delighted with any victory - that's why
> they cheat.
>
>
>> Only an honest competitor will truly enjoy the win for the long term.
>
> How would you know - you're not dishonest?  :-)
>
>
>> Rules should be enforced, but they should also be enforceable.
>
> It's preferable that rules can be enforced.  At present,
> there's no absolute way of enforcing power-lever rules,
> but that's no reason not to have power-level rules.
>
>
>> 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.
>
> Isn't that equivalent to ignoring the issue of cheating
> in contesting, and hoping it will go away?
>
>
>> 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.
>
> On the contrary, all these seem to be perfectly
> reasonable things to do.
>
>
>> If you do have an honest win, why spoil it with some nagging doubt about
>> whether you fully, absolutely complied with the rules?
>
> When anyone has nagging doubts about whether they
> complied with the rules, chances are they didn't
> have an honest win.
>
> Rules that are updated promptly in the light of
> experience are essential to combat cheating in
> contesting.
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>