[CQ-Contest] K9YC, WRTC, deep pockets

[Ron Notarius W3WN]

The real question is, why do we (or at least many of us) feel the need for
"inspectors" or "referees" to visit contest stations in operation during
major contests?

Look, either you trust someone, or you don't.  

If you trust them, there should be no need for the inspectors, Ronald Reagan
quotes ("Trust - but verify") from the era of the Cold War not withstanding.

If you don't trust them, unless the inspectors are there for the entire
length of the contest, you're not going to believe the inspectors "clean
bill of health" anyway.  'Oh, they cleaned up their act when WX3XYZ was
there, but as soon as he left, they went right back to their old tactics!'
or something along these lines.

The REAL problem is, simply put, that too many of the top contest operators
don't trust each other.  ( And yes, I know that there are many actual
situations of rules and/or ethics violations, ie cheating, that have come to
light in the past, which is why so many don't trust so many others.  I'm not
by any means condoning said violations, just looking at the aftermath. )

Solve the real problem, and the need for inspectors ought to go away.

So how do you solve the real problem?

73, ron w3wn

-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Jack Brindle
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 1:29 PM
To: CQ-Contest Reflector
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] K9YC, WRTC, deep pockets

I can see a new tactic on the horizon. Send a friend to inspect the station
of a major competitor to disrupt their concentration.
Even better, send a constant stream of visitors so the op never really gets
going. It could be really great, until THEY retaliate in-kind.

Is this really a solution to a real problem?

- Jack, W6FB

> On Aug 20, 2016, at 1:44 PM, Radio K0HB <kzerohb at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> This is a joke, right? Inspectors?
> 
> Will they bring dogs, urine test kits, yellow police tape?
> 
> This is about AMATEURs, guys playing electronic splatball with our toy 
> radios?
> 
> 
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 13:32 Tonno Vahk <tonno.vahk at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> What Ranko proposed was that the potential qualifiers will commit to 
>> letting anybody into their station for inspection at any time during 
>> any qualifying contest (ideally this should still be agreed and 
>> authorized by sponsors beforehand). There are local contesters who 
>> are ready to do that without any financial support from contest 
>> sponsors!
>> 
>> Sponsors would probably just need to set some standards as to what is 
>> expected from the voluntary inspectors (e.g. recommended video and 
>> audio recording with simple handheld camera/phone and documenting the 
>> RF path, etc). As I understand there are many contesters in e.g. 
>> Balkan region who are frustrated enough and ready to do that so we 
>> should give them chance to enable the self-regulation of the contesting
scene.
>> 
>> 73
>> ES5TV
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf 
>> Of kr2q at optimum.net
>> Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:43 PM
>> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] K9YC, WRTC, deep pockets
>> 
>> K9YC said:
>> As I have said, the far greater problems are those related to 
>> geography and the huge advantage to those with the deepest pockets.
>> 
>> KR2Q sez:
>> Yes, I agree.  I's that way in contesting.  It's that way in everything.
>> 
>> Scar (Lion King) sez:
>> Life's not fair, is it.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMzPsOy-pe4
>> 
>> If a more equitable way can be found and implemented, go for it.
>> Interesting discussion.
>> I still like Ranko's thoughts on on-site inspections during "qualifying"
>> competitions...if only the contest sponsors had the necessary resources.
>> 
>> de Doug KR2Q
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

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


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus