[UK-CONTEST] UBN errors

[Stewart GM4AFF]

Dave,
I'd go halves! - I totally agree. The errors must be human - folk sending
the QSO number manually, not the serial, sounds like the most obvious
problem. I've used WinTest since it was released and have never heard it get
it wrong - it never skips a beat. We must be able to track down those who
are doing it?!
Anyway, where are these UBNs? - I've not been told where mine is!

73
Stewart
GM4AFF

-----Original Message-----
From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Dave Lawley
Sent: 02 March 2012 17:15
To: UK Contest Reflector
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] UBN errors

Chris

Buy yourself a copy of Win-Test. If you can demonstrate any flakiness
concerning serial numbers when using it as a single op I will remit the cost
of your purchase to you.

Cheers, Dave G4BUO

On 02/03/2012 17:06, Chris G3SJJ wrote:
> I agree with Ian that some analysis needs to be done. The out-by-one 
> error is now being shown up significantly in UBNs. I don't think most 
> OBO errors are at the receiving end but I do think there is some attribute
(feature!) of the sender's logging program which is causing this. The fact
that Wintest figures a lot is noticeable and should provide some focus as to
where to initially start looking.
>
> In the "good ol' days" of manual checking paper or computerised logs 
> it was easy to detect if the sender was causing a problem and in such
cases could be penalised rather than the receiver, but now with Susie
helping us to automate things maybe that element is missing!
>
> I do feel agrieved at losing points because of flaky s/w at the other end!
>
> Chris G3SJJ
>
>
>
> On 02/03/2012 14:57, Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
>> Dave wrote:
>>>> You only need to type one letter in N1MM callsign field for it to 
>>>> display the correct outgoing serial number. Without that single 
>>>> letter the programme does not know that you are not trying to 
>>>> complete your previous QSO.  73 Clive GM3POI
>>>>
>>> Exactly the same is true of Win-Test.
>>>
>>> I am sure that most of the time, when serials differ by one it is 
>>> down to user error but it is not clear whether the error is with the 
>>> sender or the receiver. For that reason, serials out by one should 
>>> not be penalised. That is how I used to do it when I checked the 80m 
>>> CC contests. If the automated checking now used by the Committee is 
>>> penalising serials out by just one, I think that is going too far.
>>>
>>> Dave G4BUO
>> Please, no...  Imagine what would happen if word got around that all 
>> "out by one" receiving errors would be excused! Those kinds of broken 
>> exchange errors should be penalised, along with busted callsigns and 
>> the missing /P.
>>
>> But only if we can be sure that we're all being penalised FAIRLY [1]
>>
>> It really is time this was sorted:
>>
>> 1. Analysis of existing log archives to identify the *sending* 
>> stations involved in UBNs - not just "off by one", but errors of all 
>> kinds. If any individuals stand out, then it was probably their fault 
>> and they need to be told.
>>
>> Nothing further can be done about past contests, but those stations 
>> should be flagged to warn the adjudicators of future contests.
>>
>> 2. The same analysis routinely applied when adjudicating current 
>> contests. Receiving stations should not be penalised for any UBNs 
>> involving those stations. (The question of penalties for the sending 
>> stations should be left to the judgement of the CC, until we're a lot 
>> more certain about what's actually happening.)
>>
>> 3. Is there a correlation between those persistent offenders and the 
>> software they are using (as declared in the Cabrillo file)?
>>
>>
>>
>> [1] Please, let's hear no more excuses that "Everything is OK because 
>> the unfairness is spread around".  That line has long passed its 
>> smell-by date.
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2113/4846 - Release Date: 03/02/12