[CQ-Contest] CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 171, Issue 16
Marcelo Egues
marcelocx2dk at gmail.com
Mon Mar 6 16:58:08 EST 2017
Hi guys
After a few days of thinking:
1) W4PA uses the CQWW rules, it´s your job.
2) I´m not angry with anyone, but if my log is doubtful, should have been
assisted and not checklog.
3) LU7HN (second position) has the same audio mistake
Once again my solution:
1) The audio is useless. We need to film with a simple camcorder so you can
see the operators, real power, cluster, etc. during the contest
2) Reduce the days of log receipt
My personal opinion.
Assembling a first-level contest station here in Uruguay is not easy.
It is much more complicated than you think.
I do not think that besides all the work to assemble and maintain this
contest station, we also have audio recording.
Audio recording is a very sensitive topic because participants can check
the record after the contest end
73
Marcelo CX2DK/CW4MAX
2017-03-06 18:24 GMT-03:00 <cq-contest-request at contesting.com>:
> Send CQ-Contest mailing list submissions to
> cq-contest at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cq-contest-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cq-contest-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CQ-Contest digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: CX2DK DQ (Jim Brown)
> 2. Re: Query re C31XR, 1 or 3 feeds? (Ria Jairam)
> 3. Re: CX2DK - NOT DQ (Jorge Diez - CX6VM)
> 4. Re: CX2DK DQ (Jim Stahl)
> 5. Stew Perry Start Time (Tree)
> 6. Re: CX2DK DQ (W0MU Mike Fatchett)
> 7. Re: Query re C31XR, 1 or 3 feeds? (Peter Dougherty (W2IRT))
> 8. Re: CX2DK DQ (W0MU Mike Fatchett)
> 9. Re: CX2DK DQ (Steve London)
> 10. Re: CX2DK - NOT DQ (Jim Brown)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 09:27:20 -0800
> From: Jim Brown <k9yc at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CX2DK DQ
> Message-ID:
> <326b5bdc-4092-d4b1-bf80-d88d28294924 at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> On Mon,3/6/2017 6:12 AM, James Cain wrote:
> > Better to let nine guilty people go free than to execute one innocent
> > person.
>
> This quotation, about life and death, is totally inappropriate with
> respect to scoring of a contest.
>
> I agree with W4PA and other members of the committee. Rules have been
> established to help expose some forms of cheating. It's sad that it's
> necessary, but if we want to enter any contest and qualify for an award,
> we must know and obey the rules.
>
> I'm regularly disappointed that a significant number of NAQP
> participants don't obey the rules that require that a single-op be
> non-assisted and no more than 100W, as indicated by obvious
> cluster-inspired peaks of activity, and signals that sure don't sound
> like 100W.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 12:47:12 -0500
> From: Ria Jairam <rjairam at gmail.com>
> To: David Siddall <hhamwv at gmail.com>
> Cc: cq-contest <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Query re C31XR, 1 or 3 feeds?
> Message-ID:
> <CAMCyBs4R2___Q8eMeequcgftp8kf_bQKP4HVXrHaRzAqOJpDWw at mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Wouldn't it be better performance wise since you don't have to worry about
> a combiner?
>
> I believe the only downside is that you'd need 3 feedlines which cost more.
>
> Ria, N2RJ
>
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:35 AM, David Siddall <hhamwv at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm hoping to have my C31XR on the ground this week to re-attach the 20M
> > reflector that fell last October. I am feeding all 3 bands with a
> single
> > coax. If you have any information about the pros/cons of feeding each
> band
> > separately, please send it my way! Interested in performance - related
> > info, not SO2R possibilities.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Dave K3ZJ
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 15:13:23 -0300
> From: Jorge Diez - CX6VM <cx6vm.jorge at gmail.com>
> To: Scott Robbins <w4pa at yahoo.com>
> Cc: CQ CONTEST <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CX2DK - NOT DQ
> Message-ID:
> <CA+h_a7Lzd1w2c4tBcnqLV2fSkUuqkPBYqr6R6e8276L=k1cbXw at mail.gmail.
> com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> sure, a great amateur contest station, not a profesional audio studio
>
> You must be tired to repeat always the same. Other DQ ops told that you
> never answer them, dont know what is best
>
> 73,
> Jorge
>
>
> 2017-03-05 23:31 GMT-03:00 Scott Robbins via CQ-Contest <
> cq-contest at contesting.com>:
>
> > >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 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.
> > Hi -
> > The "best contest station" should also include the ability to record an
> > entire contest, which is much easier than building towers, running many
> km
> > of cables or the million other hardware things a serious contest operator
> > has to worry about.
> > CX2DK was asked for a recording after the 2015 contest, was unable to
> > provide it, and the committee took no action. A year passed, another
> > contest was run, we asked for the recording for 2016 and it was again not
> > available. This time the action to move this entry to a checklog - not a
> > disqualification - was taken.
> > I will again suggest, if you are intent on being a serious entry in a
> > single op category for CQWW to review the rules and assure you are able
> to
> > comply with them.
> > Scott RobbinsW4PA
> > CQWW committee
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 73,
> Jorge
> CX6VM/CW5W
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 12:53:20 -0500
> From: Jim Stahl <jimk8mr at aol.com>
> To: James Cain <jamesdavidcain at gmail.com>
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CX2DK DQ
> Message-ID: <D743EF2A-A74D-46BA-A05D-58F0271243E5 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> 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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 11:05:17 -0800
> From: Tree <tree at kkn.net>
> To: 160 <topband at contesting.com>, "cq-contest at contesting.com"
> <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Stew Perry Start Time
> Message-ID:
> <CAKF9HhYASfsqQNtofHeB-E48PJ=WnqYNm1S8dmaPPKratuUB3Q at mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> As some have noticed - I put the wrong start time for the Stew Perry in my
> previous message.
>
> The correct start time is 1500Z - not 1200Z.
>
> Tree
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 13:08:08 -0700
> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CX2DK DQ
> Message-ID: <45ccba9c-7046-203e-18b3-8aab9922e306 at w0mu.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Participants are not bound by any rules. Why is this a problem? Would
> you rather have fewer contacts? I don't mind working people with 1500
> watt stations in NAQP. I don't get it. Lets have less fun? No thanks!
>
> Single ops with packet are legal but they get tossed in with the Multi ops.
>
> The only people that need to follow the rules are those actually in the
> competition to get their paper award.
>
> W0MU
>
>
> On 3/6/2017 10:27 AM, Jim Brown wrote:
> > On Mon,3/6/2017 6:12 AM, James Cain wrote:
> >> Better to let nine guilty people go free than to execute one innocent
> >> person.
> >
> > This quotation, about life and death, is totally inappropriate with
> > respect to scoring of a contest.
> >
> > I agree with W4PA and other members of the committee. Rules have been
> > established to help expose some forms of cheating. It's sad that it's
> > necessary, but if we want to enter any contest and qualify for an
> > award, we must know and obey the rules.
> >
> > I'm regularly disappointed that a significant number of NAQP
> > participants don't obey the rules that require that a single-op be
> > non-assisted and no more than 100W, as indicated by obvious
> > cluster-inspired peaks of activity, and signals that sure don't sound
> > like 100W.
> >
> > 73, Jim K9YC
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 15:23:03 -0500
> From: "Peter Dougherty \(W2IRT\)" <contesting at w2irt.net>
> To: "'David Siddall'" <hhamwv at gmail.com>, "'cq-contest'"
> <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Query re C31XR, 1 or 3 feeds?
> Message-ID: <00df01d296b7$75c286b0$61479410$@net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I've asked this several times over the years and the unequivocal answer
> I've
> received is to keep it as a single feedline. Less maintenance, fewer
> chances
> of anything going wrong, and also the 15m feed can sometimes be finicky
> according to some. Mine is also single-fed and I have no complaints.
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> GO FRC!
> Peter, W2IRT
>
> www.facebook.com/W2IRT
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> David Siddall
> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 11:35 AM
> To: cq-contest
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Query re C31XR, 1 or 3 feeds?
>
> I'm hoping to have my C31XR on the ground this week to re-attach the 20M
> reflector that fell last October. I am feeding all 3 bands with a single
> coax. If you have any information about the pros/cons of feeding each band
> separately, please send it my way! Interested in performance - related
> info,
> not SO2R possibilities.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Dave K3ZJ
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 13:32:07 -0700
> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CX2DK DQ
> Message-ID: <ce250818-5150-0c93-073c-5b6526c69692 at w0mu.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> 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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 13:39:56 -0700
> From: Steve London <n2icarrl at gmail.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CX2DK DQ
> Message-ID: <58BDC91C.6080308 at arrl.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> On 03/06/2017 10:27 AM, Jim Brown wrote:
> >
> > I'm regularly disappointed that a significant number of NAQP
> > participants don't obey the rules that require that a single-op be
> > non-assisted and no more than 100W, as indicated by obvious
> > cluster-inspired peaks of activity, and signals that sure don't sound
> > like 100W.
>
> In the recent January 2017 NAQP preliminary results, there were 130 logs
> that were self-classified as either multi-2, with just a single person
> operating, or as Check Logs. These categories accommodate the
> participants you speak of, above.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 12:41:53 -0800
> From: Jim Brown <k9yc at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CX2DK - NOT DQ
> Message-ID:
> <64c2744c-46bc-6627-d4c8-888f83f7cbc1 at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Jorge,
>
> With all due respect, making a recording of a contest by feeding
> headphone audio to a computer or dedicated audio recorder is hardly
> "professional audio." I've posted links to presentations and write-ups
> about simple ways to do it by hams who are NOT audio professionals. And
> as an audio professional myself, I've offered advice about very simple
> ways to do it.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
> On Mon,3/6/2017 10:13 AM, Jorge Diez - CX6VM wrote:
> > sure, a great amateur contest station, not a profesional audio studio
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 171, Issue 16
> *******************************************
>
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list