[CQ-Contest] Was Self spotting now T48K DQ

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

T48K could simply release their recordings and prove some of their claims.

That might be a start.

W0MU


On 4/18/2017 2:20 PM, Rich Assarabowski wrote:
> First of all, I have no self-interest in any of this, just an "innocent
> bystander" who was lucky enough not have any friends spot me in either CQWW
> CW or SSB ;)
>
>   
>
> Bob, if your (i.e. the Committee's) basis of disqualification of T48K were
> obvious and persistent on-the-air requests for spotting as confirmed by SDR
> recordings, we wouldn't  be having this discussion, would we?
>
>   
>
> At issue is the methodology you used to accuse and ultimately disqualify a
> lot of people of self spotting based on either of two events:
>
>   
>
> 1)      A spot was made when there was a drop in the rate
>
> 2)      A spot was made shortly after a QSY
>
>   
>
> If you observed this done by a spotter more than once or twice, you arrived
> at the conclusion that there was obviously collusion and that was your basis
> for sending a disqualification letter.   You dismissed the possibility that
> a friend could sitting on a DX friend's frequency and listening to his DX
> friend running.  When the rate dropped, that would be the logical point to
> respot.    Your conclusion in this situation (#1), however, was that this
> was clearly a sign of direct communication with the DX station - huh?
> Similarly, when the DX changed frequency and the spotter respotted him
> within a minute or two, you concluded that there was direct communication
> between them.    As an experienced op yourself, you know that when a DX
> station changes frequency or band, especially a loud station from the
> Caribbean on a quiet band,  it is not difficult to find him.    This is
> especially easy with the use of waterfall displays where a mouse click from
> one loud signal to another will quickly (within a minute or two) locate the
> new frequency.      In your DQ letters, however, you presented this
> situation (#2) as undisputable proof of collusion.
>
>   
>
> Your methodology may be a good way screening for possible violations, but
> any logical thinking person would agree that is not proof.    This is akin
> to the use of uniques analysis routinely done on all logs.   A large number
> of uniques in a log is a SUGGESTION of miscopied calls and/or padding a log,
> but is not de facto evidence of busted calls or log padding, without further
> investigation (cross-checking, etc.).    It seems the Committee did not
> avail themselves of that additional effort and hastily jumped the gun.
>
>   
>
> As far as "excessive" spotting, I've never seen anything in the rules that
> or contest etiquette that limits how many times someone can spot.   If  a
> guy wants to spend the weekend SWL'ing and putting out spots, whether as a
> cheerleader for a friend or just to have the satisfaction of filling out
> someone else's band map, that is his choice.    This is all under the
> assumption that there is no direct communication between him and a contest
> station - he is doing this completely on his own.     KR2Q's guidelines in
> the CQWW blog to limit spots by friends is completely unenforceable and
> unrealistic.   It is ludicrous to disqualify someone just because a friend
> was unknowingly trying to help him, which is exactly what happened with T48K
> and undoubtedly others.
>
>   
>
> So bottom line - you claim in your last post that T48K was disqualified
> based on SDR recordings of on-the-air spot requests, yet your criteria for
> disqualification that you presented in the DQ letter to him and others was
> the methodology described above.     So which was it?
>
>   
>
> Once again, I would  propose that this whole issue go away by a rules change
> allowing self-spotting for everyone, however it's implemented.   Let's have
> the Committee focus on the really serious issues facing contests, which are
> excessive power,  use of distant remotes for receiving and transmitting and
> multi-ops submitting as single ops.   These are the much more serious issues
> which deserve attention and which really undermine the integrity of this
> sport.
>
>   
>
> --- Rich K1CC
>
>       "Friends don't let friends spot you"
>
>   
>
> On 4/17/2017 2:36 PM, w5ov at w5ov.com wrote:
>
>> OK.  That's enough.
>> There was apparent evidence of off-air communication with VE3XIN and
>> T48K in approximately 60 suspicious spots of T48K.
>> To confirm this and other claims of innocence, SDR recordings of T48K
>> were evaluated.
>> During this review, several instances of T48K requesting to be spotted
>> over the air, directly in violation of the rules were noted.
>> At that point, no further investigation was necessary and the
>> Disqualification confirmed.
>> Those are the key facts of the T48K DQ.
>> There were no hunches, feelings or other unsubstantiated reasons for
>> the T48K DQ.
>> No "friends" spotted anyone a few times leading to a DQ.
>> 73,
>> Bob W5OV
>> CQWW Contest Committee
>   
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest