[CQ-Contest] When it's over, it's over (again)

W0MU Mike Fatchett w0mu at w0mu.com
Thu Nov 10 20:12:08 EST 2016

In this case the patient is the one penalized...........:(

How can I know what you copied unless you are saying that all exchanges 
must be sent back and confirmed.  If so you might have a tough time 
selling it.  People like to contest for the speed runs.  SS is loosing 
traction because of the very long, read boring exchange unless you are SO2R.

Generally it is the receiver that blows the exchange.  I have yet to 
hear N1MM+ screw up sending my memory info.

On 11/10/2016 4:48 PM, Igor Sokolov wrote:
> Ward,
> Very interesting. But this approach begs  the question: If 
> prescription finally got wrong (name of the medicine or dosage) who's 
> fault is it? Transmitter or receiver? Should not both sides be penalized?
> 73, Igor UA9CDC
> ----- Исходное сообщение ----- От: "Ward Silver" <hwardsil at gmail.com>
> Кому: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Отправлено: 10 ноября 2016 г. 21:18
> Тема: Re: [CQ-Contest] When it's over, it's over (again)
>> > If it wasn't a penmanship contest then, why is it a typing contest 
>> now?
>> At the risk of setting off a "plastic owl pointing true north by 
>> remote control" thread...
>> Why is it that we have contests at all?  It is to practice our 
>> ability to communicate and to reward effectiveness - in whatever form 
>> that takes. Part of it is knowing when the bands are open and 
>> closed.  Part of it is assembling a station that works well.  Part of 
>> it is having good operating technique.  And part of it is accurately 
>> transcribing the exchanged information into whatever format is required.
>> We are fond of claiming that contesting makes us good public service 
>> operators and all that back-patting we do for ourselves.  Imagine we 
>> are relaying orders for prescription medicines needed in a disaster 
>> area.  Is a typo in "hydrochlorothiazide" acceptable because we were 
>> in a hurry? ("Can you give me that phonetically before the band 
>> closes?") Is mistakenly changing a dosage of 50 mg to 500 mg OK 
>> because we hit 0 twice? ("Whoa - how did that huge hairy bat get in 
>> here?")  Of course not...we would recognize that as an error and we 
>> should do so when N0AX gets changed to N0XA.  Each unforced error 
>> needs to produce negative feedback so we will work to lower our error 
>> rate.  The CQ WW introduction of penalties for errors was exactly the 
>> right remedy for sloppy operating because it provides both carrot and 
>> stick to operate at a rate no faster than what optimizes effective 
>> operating.  Nothing is error-free but a three-QSO penalty has a way 
>> of focusing the mind.
>> At any rate (so to speak), anything noted during the period of 
>> competition is fair game for log correction.  I would prefer in the 
>> long term that QSOs are submitted in real-time and verified shortly 
>> thereafter so that this whole notion of "log" goes away along with 
>> all the misbehavior and delays it engenders, but in the mean time, 
>> transcription into the submitted record of competition is as much a 
>> part of the contest as transmitting the information in the first place.
>> 73, Ward N0AX
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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