[CQ-Contest] CX2DK DQ
Barry
w2up at comcast.net
Sat Mar 4 19:35:23 EST 2017
Jorge,
You are correct. I no longer do competitive single op efforts. If I
did, having spent the time and money to build a competitive station, I
certainly would learn the rules and comply with them. The CC doesn't
have to tell Marcelo what they are looking for. All they need to do is
say (as they did), "we would like the audio you are required to have."
For all we know, if he provided the audio, as required by the rules,
they would review it and say everything is good.
Keeping suspicions private is a good thing. The more the CC reveals,
the more info cheaters have to stay one step ahead and circumvent the rules.
Barry W2UP
On 3/4/2017 16:47, Jorge Diez - CX6VM wrote:
> Barry
>
> if you are not at K0RF, as single op you did very few hours of CQWW
> SSB in the last years, so is easy to you to say if you don´t like the
> rules, don´t play the game.
>
> Marcelo is building the best contest station in CX and he sit at the
> chair and spend a whole contest alone. I don´t like the rules, so he
> and me as many others will not follow your advice.
>
> The others that write here, told that W4PA don´t say the reason they
> asked for the audio. This bad communication from W4PA is what makes us
> to don´t know if they disqualified him because he did not have the
> audio or for suspicions of lying.
>
> from other CC member, I know is not only because he did not have the
> audio, they have suspicious of lying. Anyway, never told Marcelo what
> was the suspicious, if working 25 multipliers in 1 minute or working
> AAA0A that was spotted or whatever.
>
> So to finish that:
> - he was reclassified because they have suspicions about the log. So
> for someone here that have this same dude, it was not just for not
> having the audio. Unfortunately he not recorded the contest. (I
> didn't record the contest also)
> - In case he recorded the contest, I don't think the recording will
> help the operator. CC will tell you that because of the audio, seems
> he was very fast going from one station to another, but you can do
> that in many other ways that are not necessarily the cluster
>
> 73,
> Jorge
> CX6VM/CW5W
>
> 2017-03-04 12:36 GMT-03:00 Barry <w2up at comcast.net
> <mailto:w2up at comcast.net>>:
>
> *XIII. DECLARATION:*
>
> By submitting a CQ WW DX Contest log, and in consideration of the
> efforts of the CQ WW DX Contest Committee to review and evaluate
> that log, an entrant unconditionally and irrevocably agrees that
> he/she has: 1) read and understood the rules of the contest and
> agrees to be bound by them, 2) operated according to all rules and
> regulations that pertain to amateur radio for the station
> location, 3) agreed the log entry may be made open to the public,
> and *4) accepted that the issuing of disqualifications and other
> decisions of the Committee are official and final. If an entrant
> is unwilling or unable to agree to all of the foregoing, the
> entrant should not submit the entry or submit the entry as a
> Checklog only.
> *
>
> If you don't like the rules, don't play the game. (Bold added.)
>
> Barry W2UP
>
>
>
> On 3/4/2017 08:27, Rudy Bakalov wrote:
>
> There will be a lot less frustration vented out here if the
> process was principled and transparent; it is not. I am not
> referring to the mechanics of how cheating is detected.
>
> There seem to be no principles around how to handle suspected
> behavior. Only a few weeks ago we learned about the extensive
> dialogue between the committee and 3V8SS. Now, there is zero
> dialogue between the two sides, only a request for the
> recording. In other instances RBN data was being used as a
> reason to suspect abuse of power even though such procedures
> are not disclosed upfront in the published rules.
>
> Why do we care about principles? Because the rules will never
> cover all situations and circumstances. Principles, just like
> the constitution, guide us how to make decisions when the
> rules are incomplete or do not exist.
>
> I also believe that everybody deserves a fair trial, including
> by its peers. CX2DK, 3V8SS, LZ2RS, etc. have every right to
> bring up their complaints to the public and ask the judges to
> explain themselves. Democracy 101.
>
> Rudy N2WQ
>
> Sent using a tiny keyboard. Please excuse brevity, typos, or
> inappropriate autocorrect.
>
>
> On Mar 4, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Barry <w2up at comcast.net
> <mailto:w2up at comcast.net>> wrote:
>
> Fact not in evidence.
>
> Again, they don't ask for audio unless they have
> suspicions about the log. Apparently same concern, last
> year, no response. They let it go. You know the old
> saying - Fool me once shame on you; fool me twice, shame
> on me.
>
> Barry W2UP
>
> On 3/4/2017 06:04, Rudy Bakalov via CQ-Contest wrote:
> So in both instances, the log checker didn't have
> issues with the log, but requested the recording
> anyway. W4PA didn't mention any issues either and
> only reiterated that they asked for the recording and
> didn't get it.
>
>
> Rudy N2WQ
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
> software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 73,
> Jorge
> CX6VM/CW5W
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list