[UK-CONTEST] REAL REPORTS ?

[Roger Western]

Ian: the RSGB 'Inverse RBN' file has the same intent as the CQWW 'reverse 
log' that I described to you earlier.

Steve: To invoke the DPA is total BLX. This is a hobby. None of the data is 
personally sensitive.

Let's cut to the chase here. Contest adjudicators invest vast amounts of 
their unpaid time to declare contest results which are as fair as possible. 
Even if the rankings which they report are only 97% correct we all have to 
live with the flaws: we don't have the millions that it would cost to make 
it 99% accurate.
73 de Roger/G3SXW.


-----Original Message----- 
From: Steve Knowles
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 12:08 AM
To: uk-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] REAL REPORTS ?

Hi Ian,

For every entrant, ADJ produces an 'Inverse UBN' file - a list of all the
QSOs where the other guy got it wrong.  Consistent problems with sending (eg
GM3SE vs GM3SEK) stick out like a sore thumb, as do the (disappointingly
common) serial number sequence errors where the number sent gets out of sync
with the number logged for a while.  With problems such as these it's easy
to apportion blame to the sender.  It's less easy with the occasional
'out-by-one' error (which, with some software, can be caused by as simple a
procedural faux-pas as hitting the <send exchange> button with nothing in
the callsign field ['cos you're a bit behind] and filling in the callsign
and logging the QSO later) to be sure who's to blame, and the general rule
is that what the sender logs is assumed to be accurate.  The adjudicator has
to consider and decide upon every case individually.

It has been suggested that entrants should be provided with a copy of their
'Inverse UBN' file.  There could be problems here with the data protection
act, to which RSGB is subject, as to do this would effectively be
disseminating private information about a living, identifiable person and so
would require their consent to be lawful.

73

Steve



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ian White GM3SEK" <gm3sek at ifwtech.co.uk>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] REAL REPORTS ?


>
> It is good that ADJ checks for consistency on the part of sending
> stations.  Callsigns and location information are easy because they
> should never change... but what about variable data like serial numbers
> or ROPOCO exchanges?
>
> Does ADJ ever check the list of busted QSOs for an entire contest, to
> look for unusually high involvement on the part of certain SENDING
> stations?
>
>
> -- 
>
> 73 from Ian GM3SEK
> http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest

_______________________________________________
UK-Contest mailing list
UK-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest