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

Kelly Taylor ve4xt at mymts.net
Fri Nov 11 14:31:30 EST 2016 

Mike is right: trying to force this on an existing contest's core participants is a bad idea, but you may not need to create an entirely new contest. 

Just as WRTC is a contest overlaid on the IARU, it would be possible to allow real-time advocates to do their own contest during WW. If they maintain WW's exchange, it's something that would be invisible to other participants. 

I still say there should be some deliberate latency in reporting scores: do we really want participants to know they just messed up their last Q, or do we wish to continue with the idea of getting right using only the airwaves?

Latency means you can still judge your progress against others, but can't draw a direct line between your score and a busted Q. If you see 20 QSOs later you only got credit for 19, you don't know which of those 20 Qs you busted. How much latency to build in would have to be determined. 

73, kelly, ve4xt 



Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 11, 2016, at 12:29, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com> wrote:
> 
> I would assume that you would be ok with a new contest or contests that make this requirement?
> 
> Online gaming deals with this all the time.  If you are not online you are not in the game.  It is just part of the deal.
> 
> Trying to force this on CQ WW or ARRL DX would probably not go over well.
> 
> Ward did talk about about this in his initial post allowing logs to be saved and then transmitted after or once the internet comes back up.  All these points need to be discussed.
> 
> W0MU
> 
> 
> 
>> On 11/11/2016 8:30 AM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
>>  Good point.
>> 
>> 
>> Imagine a station with a top score in the category being DQ'd for failing to run real-time scoring, or for failing to post their score within 30 minutes of the contest ending...
>> 
>> 
>> All because some yahoo with a backhoe accidentally severed the fiber or telephone cables providing internet service to an area (or an auto accident taking out a poll, or a major snowstorm caused issues, and so forth) and the service wasn't restored until a day or three later.
>> 
>> 
>> Look, I have no problem with real-time scoring, for those who choose to participate in it.  If that's your thing, more power to you.  But imposing it as mandatory on everyone, just because the technology exists?  That's another story.
>> 
>> 
>> 73, ron w3wn
>>  
>> On 11/11/16, ve4xt at mymts.net wrote:
>> 
>> The idea real-time logging will eliminate cheating is somewhat overstated, I think.
>> 
>> Cheaters gonna cheat. They'll just find another way.
>> 
>> If you really want to "sell" real-time scoring, focusing on the negative isn't the way.
>> 
>> To me, the real benefit is the introduction of immediacy to the results. Gamers know how they're doing all through the competition. We, really, don't know until six months later. That latency is a negative when trying to recruit new blood in the age of immediate results.
>> 
>> But, and this is huge, a significant part of contesting are the folks who operate off the grid, as it were. I'm working on a station at the cottage, where we don't have Internet. Others activate field-day style for some contests, and the best DX-pedition locations have zero infrastructure.
>> 
>> You going to tell a future Heard Island we don't want you in WW?
>> 
>> I'd love to see a real-time overlay for contests, but wouldn't want to see real-time scoring become mandatory. It's a mistake to base policy on the false assumption everyone operates under the same conditions.
>> 
>> 73, kelly, ve4xt
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>>> On Nov 11, 2016, at 6:26 AM, Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw at verizon.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> It could be done, yes.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> But is it really worth doing? That is the question that I have yet to hear an answer to.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> What is the rush?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Yes, I understand that a good number of people want near-instant results. And yes, I 'get' that a good number of people think this will serve as a deterrent to 'cheating' (though I strongly suspect that those with at best questionable ethics will simply figure out another way).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Regardless, this still strikes me as a solution in search of a problem -- or worse, a solution that may end up being worse than the perceived problem.
>>> 
>>> 73, ron w3wn
>>> 
>>> On 11/10/16, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
>>> 
>>> It could be done today. Not entirely different than real time scoring
>>> on steroids. To stop any Tom foolery the contacts to be uploaded would
>>> be encrypted. Once you hit enter that qso is locked in...Done no
>>> corrections.
>>> 
>>> Start on a Sprint or a CWT or similar 4 hour event or maybe even a one
>>> hour event.
>>> 
>>> W0MU
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 11/10/2016 1:51 PM, Ward Silver wrote:
>>>> Buffering, my boy, buffering!
>>>> 
>>>> The online gamers don't seem to have too many problems. Yeah, there
>>>> are outages and they shriek in fury. Our game would go on apace
>>>> (except for maybe no spots) but there would be a backlog (see, the log
>>>> will never die) to upload once service is restored. And I'm sure
>>>> completely off-line entries would be acceptable.
>>>> 
>>>> We just need to start moving in this direction to see what problems
>>>> arise.
>>>> 
>>>> 73, Wardster
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 11/10/2016 2:32 PM, Jeff Stai wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Ward Silver <hwardsil at gmail.com
>>>>> <mailto:hwardsil at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would prefer in the long term that QSOs are submitted in real-time
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> As great as that sounds, that will be a long time coming I expect and
>>>>> hope, considering how often my internet goes down...
>>>>> 
>>>>> 73 jeff wk6i
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Jeff Stai ~ wk6i.jeff at gmail.com <mailto:wk6i.jeff at gmail.com>
>>>>> Twisted Oak Winery ~ http://www.twistedoak.com/
>>>>> Facebook ~ http://www.facebook.com/twistedoak
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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