[CQ-Contest] Finally - self spotting has become a mute point!

[Robert Chudek - K0RC]

It was about 3-1/2 years ago I asked the question below, on this 
reflector. The third full paragraph contains the core concept I was 
asking / proposing. It didn't take too long for the technology to 
'change the game plan' once again! Yes, I'm gloating! Nyuk, nyuk, 
nyuk...  :-)

Regarding those people objecting that the RBN isn't delivering a 
pristine stream of data, my opinion is that the existing level of 
accuracy is more than adequate. For example, K3LR pops up on my bandmap 
and I work him. His call sign turns gray, letting me know I have already 
worked him.

Five minutes later, EK3LR pops up on the bandmap. Funny thing is that 
EK3LR is sitting right on the same frequency as the K3LR I already 
worked. My eyes and brain tells me instantaneously it's a bust. I don't 
waste time removing it from the bandmap because I know it's going to pop 
back up there again anyway. Cleaning the bandmap is a waste of 
contesting time.

Now if there was only a way to eliminate the clueless from pointing and 
clicking their way to the elusive EK3 multiplier and causing havoc on 
the K3LR run frequency. (Or substitute any of the other traditionally 
busted spots; BY vs. 6Y, 5K vs. HK, etc. Oh and MY personal favorite 
KØRF vs. KØRC.)

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN

------------------------------------------------------------------------

>/  -----Original Message-----/
>/  From: Robert Chudek - K0RC [mailto:k0rc at citlink.net]/
>/  Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 02:18/
>/  To: cq-contest at contesting.com/
>/  Subject: [CQ-Contest] Self spotting rationale/
>/  /
>/  This isn't a rhetorical question./
>/  /
>/  How / why was the "no self spotting" rule created in the first place? Was/
>/  it a knee-jerk reaction to the introduction of new technology at the time/
>/  spotting networks began to flourish? What actual purpose does this rule/
>/  serve? Whatever that purpose, is it outdated by technology?/
>/  /
>/  The use of the spotting networks automatically classifies a participant as/
>/  "assisted" in the first place. To the non-assisted participants, why would/
>/  they care whether stations were self-spotting or not? When I operate in/
>/  the non-assisted category I don't care what is going on with the spotting/
>/  network./
>/  /
>/  To the participants in the "assisted" category, why not let them spot/
>/  their brains out? Other than saturating the spotting network I don't see a/
>/  down-side to this. If an assisted station spotted themselves once every X/
>/  minutes, many things would "fall into place."/
>/  /
>/  First, there would be fewer busted calls being spotted. Second, assisted/
>/  operators would know which bands were being used by the self spotter (are/
>/  they operating 10 meters right now or not?). Third, self spotting timers/
>/  could evolve in contest software to spot on a predetermined schedule./
>/  Fourth, David's spotting reports would not be necessary to see who was/
>/  breaking the rules. Fifth, I wouldn't have to worry whether my call would/
>/  appear on a report as "helping my team mates in our contest club" when I/
>/  spot the members. (I have basically quit spotting anyone compared to the/
>/  early days of the spotting network.)/
>/  /
>/  I can only imagine if Wal-Mart, Target, and K-Mart were not allowed to/
>/  advertise their stores were open for business and what times you would/
>/  find them open. I think the "no self spotting" rule is absurd./
>/  /
>/  73 de Bob - KØRC in MN

/