[UK-CONTEST] REAL REPORTS ?

[Roger Western]

To install antennas for the Titanic GR100MGY station we were all instructed 
to wear hard hats. (No joke).

Yes, Nubsey, the world has gone mad! Makes you want to take up knitting, 
dunnit! Even then I bet there's an EU directive defining the thickness of 
thimbles!

Just ignore H&S, DPA, PAT testing, Risk Assessment! Seemples!
73 de Roger/G3SXW.


-----Original Message----- 
From: Nubsey
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 12:47 AM
To: uk-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] REAL REPORTS ?

Gawd Struth, Now the data protection guys have found their way into cw and
ssb contests.
I assume that health and safety, will be the next government dictate to
enter the contesting field.
You cannot send at more than 30wpm without a seatbelt in case you fall out
of the chair when sending by hand.
73 to all.
Or will big brother find a metric equivalent to that soon as well
Nubsey G0VDZ
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Knowles" <g3ufy at blueyonder.co.uk>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 12:08 AM
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

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