[UK-CONTEST] Re QTC in WAEDC RTTY

[Clive Whelan]

I also abhor the default assisted category, as indeed I do the 
acquiescence  in respect of  the recording of QTCs for later 
transcription (  say in the CW event).

However, perhaps we have to think the unthinkable? Technology now makes 
both the above processes easy, and since cheating in other contests 
where such processes are proscribed, is clearly commonplace, this puts 
extreme pressure on the adjudication process. I have e.g. seen the tip 
of an iceberg in recent CQWW results, but the organisers thereof are 
kidding themselves if they think that they will be able to detect the 
use of Skimmer technology.

The question we should ask therefore is whether DARC are just lazy or 
have seen the shape of things to come? I am presently in denial and will 
continue to go fishing during WAE, but I might have to " get real" 'ere 
long if I wish to continue to enjoy contest operation.

73


Clive
GW3NJW

Dez Watson wrote:
> As others have posted regarding QTC's, you either love 'em or hate 'em.
>
> The idea behind sending and/or receiving QTC's is I think traffic 
> (message) handling, which, when done
> effeciently, can give you a real buzz. It's also a great way to pick up 
> 10 easy points, and
> a lot quicker than finding 10 new stations to work.
>
> I agree with Dave, BUO that allowing packet for all entrants took away 
> quite a bit of the magic from
> the WAE contests. If DARC re-introduced an 'un-assisted' category, then 
> the WAE contests
> would be #1 on my list of contests to enter each year.
>
> 73
>
> Dez
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>