[UK-CONTEST] The writing on the wall-part 2

[Clive Whelan]

Roger


You're position is untenable. On the one hand you make great
play of dissing a cheat in CQWW, but then say that "it's a
lost cause". CQ claim to have the software to catch the
cheats, so what's the problem?

I'll tell you what the problem is: catching cheats  and
dissing them doesn't sell magazines, that's why it only
featured in the small print this year; what sells magazines
is a dumbed down ethos, where contest rules appeal to the
lowest common denominator.

If that's CQ magazine's position, just be honest about it
like DARC. Then those of us who demur can QSY to some other
aspect of our wonderful hobby.


73


Clive
GW3NJW

-----Original Message-----
From: G3SXW [mailto:g3sxw at btinternet.com]
Sent: 14 February 2007 00:48
To: Clive Whelan; UK-Contest
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] The writing on the wall-part 2


Clive,
Yes, you are paranoid about Cluster.
You would ban all internet-connectivity for single-ops. But
lines cannot be
drawn. It's a lost cause - it cannot be uninvented. Nor can
any of the other
on-line tools which might infringe your definition of pure
single-op.
Let's also ban the XYL from bringing us tea.
Just operate in ways with which YOU are comfortable. And
enjoy it!
73 de Roger/G3SXW.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Clive Whelan" <clive.whelan at btinternet.com>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 12:09 AM
Subject: [UK-CONTEST] The writing on the wall-part 2


>I recently posted a reply from DARC regarding my whinge
> about their failure to support a non-assisted category in
> the WAE event, which indicates that they will maintain
their
> current position, and will even consider abandoning the
> marking of non-assisted entries in the results table.
>
> I also quoted several other major events which have
already
> gone down that road, but noted that our transatlantic
> cousins were still holding the line, although I still
think
> there is no smoke without fire with respect to the rumours
> of ARRL's ( hotly disputed) consideration of global
cluster
> permission; perhaps I am paranoid but.....
>
> I had a dabble in CQ WPX RTTY at the weekend, although
this
> is not really my bag. Imagine my horror therefore when my
> attention was drawn to the following snippet from the
rules:
>
> <snip>Any form of DX alerting assistance is permitted in
ALL
> categories.<snip>
>
> I confess that I am not aware whether perhaps this is the
> norm in CQ sponsored RTTY contests ( no doubt someone will
> tell me), but either way it does nothing to make me any
more
> sanguinary about the future of the non-assisted
categories.
>
> So forget about supporting petitions to Downing St. Get on
> your soapbox ( the virtual one in your Cabrillo file) and
> tell CQ what they can do with global cluster permission.
>
>
> 73
>
>
> Clive
> GW3NJW
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>