[CQ-Contest] Fwd: Proposed rules changes

Sat May 23 14:32:00 EDT 2015

Mike, W0MU, sent me a reply to my questions. He stated his emails are being
censored by the moderator and that might very well be so. Respecting the
moderator I won't forward his reply.

Reading it though has not changed my mind that the proposed rule for giving
the Observers the authority to request audio recording is a good thing
overall. I will be changing my station to include that capability should I
ever be fortunate enough to have a high enough score to attract their
interest.

Kevan
N4XL
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kevan Nason <knason00 at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Proposed rules changes
To: W0MU <w0mu at w0mu.com>
Cc: "cq-contest at contesting.com" <cq-contest at contesting.com>

Yan's comments about the object of sound recordings being available
seemed well thought out to me. He recognizes although it is not fool
proof it is a step in the right direction. Two others have posted ways
to comply with the proposed new audio recording rule with either a
free download or by purchasing a recorder that could easily be
connected to the headphone out or speaker jack and that costs less
than a decent headset or a couple visits to the gas station. Most
anyone with a shot at a good enough score to be questioned by the
Observers likely has the means to implement either of those pretty
easily. There are undoubtedly other free or low cost methods available
as well.

Mike, I know you like to be the Devils Advocate and stir things up.
But I've a question about your asking why the rules do not also
require power monitoring and video recorders. Are you implying since
there is no 100% solution to stop ALL cheating at the same time that
nothing at should be done to even try to reduce it? If so, I'm curious
as to why you are against implementing this incremental step at
reducing it -- which would appear to be a good thing for the contest
community in general. It wouldn't seem too difficult for you
personally to implement this based upon the description of your
station on your web page. And again, with what appears to be a minor
amount of work and cost anyone who thinks they have the possibility of
a score good enough for the Observers to take an interest and ask for
an audio recording is very likely to have the resources to afford
either of the two already proposed solutions.

So is your objection just on general principles, like "I don't want
any change to existing rules", or "I like to stir the pot", or...
what? What am I missing that is so evil in this rule that you aren't
supporting it? I spent years as a Nuclear Planner, a Site Manager, and
now am a Maintenance Planner at a Gas Turbine R&D facility and have
learned it is virtually impossible for anyone, not just me, to write a
procedure or rules to do a job the first time without having at least
one glitch. You define what the problem is, determine a way to
eliminate or at least reduce the problem to acceptable levels, write
up a plan as best you can, get peer/coworker feedback, revise the
initial plan, start the job, and adjust as needed during the work. We
seem to be at the peer/coworker feedback part of this process. You are
an active participant so I'm asking for your feedback. I just don't
understand why you think this is a bad idea.

And no, I am not involved with CQ nor have I been asked my opinion
about this by anyone. My interest is that I too am an active
participant in contests and if there is a valid point to not doing it
I would like to know and side with you against it. If there isn't what
I consider a good reason not to implement it, then I am for it.

Kevan
N4XL

On May 21, 2015, at 10:35 PM, W0MU <w0mu at w0mu.com> wrote:

If we are going to start requiring recordings.  Why not wattmeters
that write the peak value every 30 seconds or so to a disk with
cameras that watch that the meters are hooked up to the very last coax
segment going to the antenna system.

This should not be a big deal either.

> On 5/21/2015 7:32 PM, Gerry Hull wrote:
> "Diddly-squat"
>
> That's how much resources are required to record a contest.
>
> http://www.hamradiomap.com/qsorder/
>
> QSORecorder works with N1MM, and records the content of every completed
QSO
> -- storing
> an MP3 or WAV file with the file name YOUR_CALL_THEIR_CALL_BAND
_DATE_TIME.
>
> It runs completely separately from N1MM; it uses broadcast UDP to convey
> the info, so does not interfere with operation.
> It works with regular or plus.
>
> When K2LE and I did P40LE in ARRL DX CW this year, I recorded the entire
> contest.  I did not even notice the disk usage,
> though I only had about 20 GB free on my disk.
>
> So, for anyone who can put together a station for a Top-10 effort,
> Implementing recording should be an easy task.
>
> 73, Gerry
> W1VE
>
>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Mike Smith VE9AA <ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca>
wrote:
>>
>> Occasionally (certainly doesn't happen very often, I'll say that) when a
>> couple of the superstations in our area are not QRV, some of us in the
>> Maritimes have had totally surprise wins in certain contests. (not always
>> CQ,mind you- hi)
>>
>> Some of us have even set records.  I would say it's always a surprise for
>> whoever 'wins'.
>>
>>
>>
>> Personally I do not own land in a top tier contest locale or can afford
>> that
>> kind of station (don't even have a tower up !) so using my very old first
>> gen Win-7 laptop as the shack computer and either 100w or 500w and a
>> vertical or low wires, I am not really geared up to usually either EXPECT
>> to
>> be in the top ten anything or technologically setup to record an entire
>> contest. The HDD is mostly full now, nevermind trying to figure out how
to
>> record the full 48 hours.
>>
>>
>>
>> Maybe someone computer savvy could weigh in on this thread and indicate
to
>> the readership here just how much disk space and processor resources it
>> would require to even record such an event (CW&SSB).
>>
>>   (I am just assuming it's well beyond what a lot of stations are capable
>> of, top ten or not)  It would be interesting to know.  On the off chance
>> that PEI sinks*, what kind of evidence must folks in other parts of
Canada
>> be prepared to submit to CQ if those 2 can't play?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank goodness I seldom go assisted as the computers logging program
>> stutters now if I have a full bore telnet feed from VE7CC running
during  a
>> contest.
>>
>>
>>
>> Inquiring minds........Mike VE9AA
>>
>> *for those of you that are humour impaired, this is a joke.
>>
>> Mike, Coreen & Corey
>>
>> Keswick Ridge, NB
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

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