[CQ-Contest] Assisted vs Unassisted

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

There is virtually no way to know who is getting spots and from where.  
There will never be a system requiring and login and password and even 
if there was, there would be a 100 different ways to get around it.

You can be smart about working spots if you are cheating.

Why don't we just open the barn door completely and have a Single OP 
category.

There appears to be way too many ways to game the game as it is.

Is there much integrity left in contesting?

Mike W0MU

On 5/8/2015 9:28 PM, Jeff Clarke wrote:
> Since people aren't playing by the rules maybe CQ should get tough and consider changing the single operator unassisted transmitter class to something similar to rule 3.4.4 that is used for ARRL DX :
>
> http://www.arrl.org/arrl-dx
>
> I know this would be very unpopular to those who like to do SO2R. Note I'm not anti-SO2R because I do it myself.  Maybe even consider changing assisted to only work multipliers on the 2nd radio, similar to the current multi-single rules for CQWW. That would allow some type of SO2R for those who like operating a contest that way.
>
> On a positive side it would probably eliminate any question whether someone claiming single-op is really operating in that category. By looking at a log for someone doing dual CQ's you really can't prove one operator is doing all the operating anyway. Plus it would be easier to figure out if someone is cheating by using a spotting network because a lot of the multipliers would be worked when doing a band change. It would be easy to compare those QSO to the archives of the spots during a contest.
>
> It would probably make the log checkers job easier as there is probably a lot of effort being expended in identifying cheaters.
>
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest