[CQ-Contest] Appropriate wait time for contest results?

Fri Apr 7 10:48:26 EDT 2017

HI Everone...

I'm enjoying this  thread....I share Tom's view...

i manage the SCQP contest scoring and our goal is to complete the scoring
as soon as possible... As Tom mentioned, we receive cabrillo logs that are
not 'up to code' and I also review each log using scoring sw and via human.
Prior to 2017, we accepted paper logs...I received one log with 400+
contacts on paper... Guess what had to be done before that log was scored
using our sw system?

There are also so many logging program choices folks can use. I see logs
created with out of date programs which create cabrillo formatting
problems.. Some of the more common logging programs are current with our
rules etc, but some are never updated. Here are a few logging programs that
our players used this year... I didn't include NOTEPAD and Excel.

N1MM Logger+
N3FJP's SCQP Contest Log (Out of State)
WriteLog
N3FJP's South Carolina QSO Party Contest Log
WA7BNM Web2Cabrillo
GenLog
N1MM Logger
ADIF Export from N1MMLogger.net - Version 1.0.6076.0
HamRadioDeluxe
Win-Test
ADIF Export from N1MMLogger.net - Version 1.0.6044.0
DXKeeper
KJ4IZW Cabrillo2ADIF
MixW
Aether
CQ/X de NO5W Version
CQPWIN VER.
SkookumLogger
TR Log POST Version
TextWrangler.app

(If you have any part in the development/maintenance of any of these
programs, please review our rules at www.scqso.com every 4-5 months... We
will have scoring changes each year. Thank you to the guys who keep their
sw updated!!!!)

With the small contests, like QPs, every contact and multiplier is the
difference between winning and coming in 2nd place... I've been there as a
player many times! That means, that means to me that any contacts that are
in question, must be reviewed. Scoring a smaller contest using ONLY a sw
scoring program without human intervention is an injustice to all entries.
Does this happen?

My goal is for the process to be completed as soon as possible while
ensuring that the scoring process was valid and results were accurate.

Just an observation from a very active contest participant. Since I have
experience on both sides of the contest... as a player and admin... I do
believe that there are contests which may delay results to create interest
in the next year's contest... Like publishing the results within a month or
two of the next contest. By all means, please publish the results when
completed.

After 4 years of 'continuous' contesting,  I have a 'results posting
calendar', so I know when to expect the results each year..

By the way, thanks the MDCQP for the nice 2016 plaque and I can't wait to
receive my 2016 OHQP and 2016 NYQP plaques.

Enjoy the GAQP this weekend!

73s Dave WN4AFP

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Tom Haavisto <kamham69 at gmail.com> wrote:

> From your comments, I gather you have never been involved in post contest
> log processing.
>
> Fair enough, but consider this:  I look after a QSO Party, and handle the
> post contest logs.  This is not a complaint - I am happy to do it, but it
> is interesting to see the post contest logs.  Some logs don't support my
> QSO Party, so folks choose "something close".  Some require repair work
> before I can proceed to the next step.  Some folks use old/odd software
> that "sorta" generates a Cabrillo spec output.  I hesitate to invalidate
> the efforts of a part-time entrant, lest they decide that next year - they
> simply won't bother.  Some must be from a spread sheet output.  The header
> is fine - the QSO lines are... odd, but contain all the info I need.
>
> I realize full well that this is MY choice - to repair the logs so they can
> proceed in the log checking process,  Yes - it takes time to correct these
> logs, and I am happy to do it.
>
> Consider the option you seem to advocate:  "Dear contester:  your log is
> not in a valid format.  Bzzt.  You are disqualified.  Please update your
> logging software, and please try again next year.  Signed - contest
> manager".  THAT would be a heartbreaking email to receive from a contest
> manager...  *I* would not want to be the author of one.
>
> So - it may take an extra week or three while repair work is done - behind
> the scenes, silently, without comment, but it sure beats the alternative!
>
>
> Tom - VE3CX
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 9:32 AM, DXer <hfdxmonitor at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree, it's unreasonable to expect log submission within 24 hours,
> > not only for the reason mentioned, but also to give participants some
> > breathing time after the contest. This way they can review the log,
> > and deal with any issue that would cause the CC to spend time
> > correcting errors on participants behalf.
> >
> > That said, I think the CC should not get involved with correcting any
> > submission errors. I see it as part of the participants responsibility
> > to submit a log that is error free. In this case, final results after
> > a month or two may be possible.
> >
> > Nothing above is to compromise compliance with the contest rules, such
> > as any form of cheating attempt. I'm talking strictly about the time
> > the CC spends fixing 'benign' issues.
> >
> > 73 de Vince, VA3VF
> >
> > On Wed,4/5/2017 5:37 AM, Barry wrote:
> >
> > >* I think logs should be submitted within 24h of the end of the contest
> > *>* and results should be available a month later.
> > *
> > That is unreasonable for an operation that travels to a remote location
> > without internet access.
> >
> > 73, Jim K9YC
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

-- 
Dave Edmonds
PK Ministry Webs
864.288.6678
dave at pkministrywebs.com
www.pkministrywebs.com