[CQ-Contest] CQWW 2016 SSB logs now public

steve.root at culligan4water.com steve.root at culligan4water.com
Sat Jan 7 17:20:41 EST 2017

Thanks John. That's an excellent example.

73 Steve K0SR

-----Original Message-----
From: John Dorr [mailto:cqk1ar at gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2017 03:46 PM
To: steve.root at culligan4water.com
Cc: kr2q at optimum.net, kzerohb at gmail.com, 'CQ-Contest'
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 2016 SSB logs now public

 Hi Steve,In response to your request for an example: UT5UGRhttp://cqww.com/blog/ut5ugr-log-padding-in-cq-ww/Speaking purely as a private citizen, I can assure you that no log checkinggroup has achieved perfection. All log checkers can benefit from an outsideset of eyes to: 1) vet checking errors and 2) identify bad actors thatremain undetected. We got real lucky in the case of UGR, whose years ofcheating would have gone without penalty had it not been for theavailability of open logs.Keep this in perspective guys; you're not being asked to post your taxreturns or brokerage statements.73, John, K1AROn Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:28 PM,  wrote:> The crux of the matter of course is what actually constitutes an> actiionable "issue". I'd like to see a clear cut example of a discrepancy> in a log that would lead to an action by the contest sponsor....a> discrepany that wasn't found by normal log checking procedures. Anything> else has a high probability of being a witch hunt. False accusaions of> cheating will lead to acrimony.>> 73 Steve K0SR>>>> -----Original Message-----> From: DXer [mailto:hfdxmonitor at gmail.com]> Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2017 08:17 AM> To: kzerohb at gmail.com, kr2q at optimum.net, cq-contest at contesting.com> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 2016 SSB logs now public>> I had the same uneasy feeling, Hans.It sounded like a call for the> 'vigilantes' to go to work.If some 'issue' is found, it has to be dealt> with of course, but the approach to achieve this was not the best.73 de> Vince, VA3VFOn 2017-01-06 10:37 PM, kzerohb at gmail.com wrote:> Doug, this> is possibly the most disturbing message that I have ever seen on this> reflector.>> Essentially you, wearing your “Director of CQWW” hat, have> gone out to the worldwide fraternity of Amateur Radio sportsmen and> said…..>> “Hey, guys, here are the logs of everybody who played in this> Amateur Radio contest. Would you please be a good citizen and have a look> to see if you can find some cheaters among your fellow hams in there. We> look forward to your result, Comrades. Here’s a special mailbox.”>> I> really wanted to help MWA in the club competition, so I sent in a small> log. Probably too small to worry you about, but have a look anyhow. Because> it’s the last one I’ll submit.>> 73, de Hans, KØHB> "Just a boy and his> radio"™>> From: kr2q at optimum.net> Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2017 2:09> AM> To: cq-contest at contesting.com> Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 2016 SSB> logs now public>>> Please see http://cqww.com/publiclogs/2016ph/>> For> the last two years, the contest community has used the public logs to> assist the CQWW Contest Committee in finding possible “issues” with some of> the logs. We look forward to your feedback again this year.>> You may send> your findings and concerns to: questions at cqww.com>> Please base your> findings and concerns on an actual log review and not simply on your> suspicions.>> Thank you!_______________________________________________CQ-Contest> mailing listCQ-Contest at contesting.comhttp://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 listCQ-Contest at contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list