[CQ-Contest] CX2DK DQ

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

The problem is that WE do not know why the committee wants the 
recording.  W4PA has not said anything one way or another.

Follow the rules.  They are not random and you don't get to pick the 
ones you want.  He was warned last year and failed to adhere.

What more do you want the committee to do?

Making up scores is not a solution.  That opens up a totally different 
can of worms and opens the door to even more criticism of the committee.

Bottom line, if you don't like the rules, don't play.

Why is the committee taking it on the chin for the failure 2x in a row 
of a participant not following the rules?

Do we want to solve or mitigate the the cheating problem or not?

W0MU


On 3/6/2017 10:53 AM, Jim Stahl via CQ-Contest wrote:
> It’s not clear if CX2DK was suspected of cheating, or whether this was simply a case of his repeatedly not complying with a special requirement for all top scorers, to allow auditing of his effort is desired by the CQWW Committee.
>
> But to me throwing out his effort seems extreme. I’d suggest another penalty.
>
> In my other hobby, bridge, a director (the adjudicator) has the authority to issue an “adjusted score” in cases where things have been fouled up to the point of not being able to have an accurate result. This is rare, but typically is the result of misunderstanding or mental lapse, not from deliberate cheating. (There are other ways to deal with suspected cheating, an even more rare situation.)
>
> In the case of CX2DK, an “adjusted score” sounds more appropriate. If recordings are required for the top three continental scores, in the absence of a recording give him an “adjusted score” of one point less than the third place score from that continent. He still might win a country award with that score, and it could reasonably used for WRTC qualification if the WRTC chose to do so. He would still get credit for his effort, just not as much as would have happened if he followed the rules of reporting requirements.
>
>
> 73  -  Jim   K8MR
>
>
>
>
>> On Mar 6, 2017, at 9:12 AM, James Cain <jamesdavidcain at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "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 ules."  --  W2UP
>> Better to let nine guilty people go free than to execute one innocent person.  --  K1TN
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest