[CQ-Contest] Ethics of operating overtime in SS

W0MU Mike Fatchett w0mu at w0mu.com
Tue Oct 29 11:10:18 EDT 2013

Then change the rules to reflect reality.  Announce it officially and 
post it on the official website.

Mike W0MU

On 10/29/2013 7:34 AM, Bob Naumann wrote:
> Phantom points?  This is intriguing.
> Exactly who is being treated unfairly here? And how so?
> What if someone makes an honest mistake and he or she thinks he or she took
> 6 hours off, but only took 5.  Should everyone who worked that station
> during the 25th hour lose those contacts, points and multipliers?  I think
> not.
> When you think of it from this perspective, it becomes clearer that
> operating after your 24 hours should be treated as it is; which is that only
> your first 24 hours counts.  The ARRL is handling this situation properly.
> Nothing you do after that adds to your score or benefits you in any way -
> but those you work during your 25th hour earn points for those qsos as they
> should.
> To me, this is more like a single band 10m entry making qsos on 160 at night
> when 10m is closed.  Those QSOs don't count towards his 10m single band
> score, but everyone he works on 160 earns full credit.
> There's nothing "phantom" or unfair going on here.
> Generally speaking, contest sponsors are in favor of anything that increases
> activity.
> Operating more than 24 hours in the SS provides no benefit to the operator
> doing it, just like the 10m single band entry making qsos on other bands.
> All these activities do is increase enjoyment and activity for others.
>  From my perspective, anyone who operates more than 24 hours in SS
> (especially fone) deserves some sort of commendation.
> How can there be any opposition to this?
> 73,
> Bob W5OV
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> W0MU Mike Fatchett
> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 11:19 PM
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Ethics of operating overtime in SS
> It harms no one?
> Anyone working guys after 24 hours is giving out "phantom" points that
> should not count.  So VE4 or any one should be able to continue to give
> out that mult and/or points after their time has expired?
> Lets say K0EU worked VE4AA and both were in their allotted 24 hour
> periods.  VE4AA continues to operate over the allotted 24 hours and K7BG
> still needed VE4 and finds VE4AA and works him.  VE4AA is the only VE4
> in K7BG's log.
> K7BG ends up beating K0EU in the end  by a few points and nobody is harmed?
> The rules clearly state to operate 24 hours.  End of story.  It does not
> say stay on and continue to hand out one sided points. Contacts made
> after your 24 hour period is over should not count for either party as
> you are clearly operating outside the rules the way they are currently
> written.  After 24 hours are up YOUR contest period is over, done, finished.
> I am quite surprised to read that K5ZD operates 5 to 10 minutes longer
> to make sure he gets his 1440 minutes in.  Does that mean it is ok to
> operate CQ WW till around 0010 then?  What exactly is the difference?
> If your contest period is over it is over. Obviously,  the CQ WW ends
> for everyone at 0000z.  Our computers are able to calculate time very
> accurately, how did we manage when we did this on paper?
> Car races end after X laps by the car finishing first, they do not
> continue on till the car that is down 20 laps finishes the other 20 laps
> with all the other cars still running around the track racing.
> DQ?  A bit harsh but maybe not if the Qso's made after the time period
> are removed from your log and you lose by a qso that was wasted working
> someone who really should not be operating anymore.
> What do you do?  You don't ignore the rules because the log checking
> program just tosses out one side of contacts made outside the allotted
> 24 hours.
> The problem is that not everyone in the contest is really in the
> contest.  I could go to KP2A with a bunch of guys and we chose to
> operate KP2A Multi-Multi for 30 hours and don't submit a score so there
> is no problem right?  Those submitting a log to be considered for
> scoring should follow each and every rule.
> When people interpret clearly written rules like this to meet their own
> objectives does it really surprise people when others are trying to
> stretch the rules?
> I never realized there were the written rules and then a bunch of rules
> only known to those who do the log checking, etc.......... The rules
> don't seem to reflect reality.
> Mike W0MU
>    On 10/28/2013 6:03 PM, George Fremin III wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 04:52:35PM -0600, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
>>> The rules are pretty clear.  Apparently what they are doing wit the logs
>>> is contrary to the rules.  Maybe the rules should be more clearly
>>> written.  Why have rules that you don't enforce?
>>> It is pretty clear that the rules say to operate 24 of the 30. They do
>>> not say if you operate more than 24 hours your score will be determined
>>> by the first 24 hours of operation.
>>> So what is it ARRL?
>> Huh?
>> I think the log checking is enforcing the 24 hour time limit just fine.
>> How else should they handle a log that is over time?
>> DQ the entrant?
>> The rule sets a time limit to the operating period.
>> If someone operates more than the 1440 minutes of on time then
>> it makes sense to me to enforce it just as they do - by removing
>> all the points that are made after 1440 minutes of on time.
>> It is not to your advantage to operate more that 1440 minutes and as far
>> as I can tell it harms no one.
>>>> 2.4. All entries may operate no more than 24 of the 30 hours.
>>>> 2.5. Off periods may not be less than 30 minutes in length.
>>>> 2.6. Times off and on must be clearly noted in paper logs. In
>>>> electronically-submitted Cabrillo logs, off-times are calculated by the
>>>> log-checking software.
>>>> 2.7. Listening time counts as operating time.
> _______________________________________________
> 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

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list