[RTTY] BARTG HF Contest 2015 Preliminary Results

Al Kozakiewicz akozak at hourglass.com
Tue Apr 14 13:51:23 EDT 2015


The problem isn't the technology.  It's the people.  If you send me 1225 for the time but you log it as 1226, then I get penalized for a busted QSO when it was you that made the error.

And, like I point out, if BARTG is going to delve into trying to figure out what you really meant to send instead of what you logged as sent by resorting to information of dubious provenance collected from outside the QSO, then the exchange is the issue.


From: John GW4SKA <ska at bartg.org.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 10:52 AM
To: Al Kozakiewicz; rtty-contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] BARTG HF Contest 2015 Preliminary Results

Isn't that wonderful.

All the clever programmers and top end PCs can't be made to work as well as
a 70 years old machine.

So BARTG should change the rules ????????????

(writing personally and not with BARTG hat on)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Al Kozakiewicz" <akozak at hourglass.com>
To: "rtty-contesting.com" <rtty at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 2:12 AM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] BARTG HF Contest 2015 Preliminary Results

> This thread illustrates a fundamental flaw with the exchange that should
> be fixed.
> I'm sure this wasn't a problem when the BARTG RTTY was conducted using
> actual teleprinters (emphasis on the "printer") and paper logs.
> Computers and automation have created a problem where there was none
> before.  Normally you would assume that the log of the originator would be
> the authority of what facts were sent. Ideally, If they logged their
> exchange incorrectly, they should pay a penalty.  But that is impossible
> to ascertain because of misuse, misunderstanding or incompetence.  I
> believe strongly that contests should be adjudicated simply and based
> solely on the data submitted.  Data elements should not be inferred from
> some out-of-band information like an RBN, or exchange elements falling
> within a tolerance level. If you can't readily determine a fact (e.g. time
> sent) in an absolute sense and with a high degree of certainty from the
> data submitted by the participants, then there is no point in exchanging
> that fact.  It subtracts value.
> The time element of the BARTG exchange should be discarded in favor of
> something inherently idiot proof.
> Al
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ben
> Antanaitis - WB2RHM
> Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 8:09 PM
> To: rtty-contesting.com
> Subject: [RTTY] BARTG HF Contest 2015 Preliminary Results
> On 05/09/2015 you wrote:
> If the user used the {TIME2} macro in their strings then the time sent and
> logged and outputted in the cab file should be the same and nothing for
> them has changed at all before during and after the contest. If the user
> did not use the {TIME2} macro  (Their own fault for not reading the setup
> instructions.) Then their time sent was probably going to be different.
> Hope this answers all the questions..
> 73 Rick N2AMG
> Rick,
> Thanks, for taking your time to answer my questions. You explanation
> reassures me that my log, contest transmissions, and Cab data are all
> accurate, since I used {TIME2} where appropriate.
> Thanks also, for all the time you and the team have invested in the
> N1MM+ upgrade.
> 73,
> Ben - WB2RHM/4
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2015.0.5863 / Virus Database: 4331/9533 - Release Date: 04/14/15

More information about the RTTY mailing list