[CQ-Contest] Request to publish all calls of stations found to be breaking any rule in all contests

[Pete Smith N4ZR]

I have no problem with that, Tim, but continue to think that it would 
enhance the committee's credibility if they named the infraction that 
did result in the DQ.  It's not unlike the tax evasion cases that used 
to be brought against Mafia bosses, when "everyone knew" they had done 
many other things.  The prosecutors still had to make their case for the 
charge they *did* bring.  Or are you suggesting that the assistance 
charge by itself might not have been sufficient for a DQ, but they got 
arbitrarily tougher once the log padding became clear?

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now
spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

On 4/16/2017 12:08 PM, Tim Shoppa wrote:
> N4ZR suggests:
>> Warnings shouldn't be publicized, but if someone is
>> listed as DQ, then any "shaming" has already been done, so putting the
>> specific violation alongside the call would be a pretty cost-free
>> contribution to confidence in the CQWWCC's processes
> Often times the official reason given for disqualification is not the only
> possible reason for disqualification. It's just the one that was easiest to
> find and prove. Like putting Al Capone in the slammer for income tax
> evasion.
>
> TO7A's DQ in CQ WW CW 2014 for example. Officially disqualified for
> unclaimed assistance, but further investigation shows log padding using
> callsigns known not to send in logs, something that can be found if you
> look for the pattern, but is harder to turn up in log checking.
>
> I think the contest committee needs the flexibility to disqualify cheaters
> for the reason that was easiest to prove.
>
> Tim N3QE
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>