[UK-CONTEST] CQ WW webinar 21st October

Tue Oct 23 06:03:15 EDT 2012

I disagree Mark. Operating a radio, making contacts and logging them is different to keyboard skills. This becomes very apparent in Field Days. I can 
be confident I copied DL0CS/P and said DL0CS/P but a check through the Excel file sorted on callsign might indicate a QSO on one band entered as 
DL0CSP or DL0CSP/, with others entered as DL0CS/P. This is purely down to my typing skills and not poor operating. Similarly if I call and log 
correctly W3LPL and they move me to another band and I enter the QSO as W3LLP, then again I would need change that typo.

Having spent many hours chatting on CW over the last few years I have found that there is definitely a difference in the response time of my right 
hand compared with my left hand which has affected the accuracy of my typing. For example, often when I type "the " it appears as "h te" or other 
combos. I will continue to do sorts and checks to make sure I am not penalised for this which is nothing to do with contest accuracy.

73
Chris G3SJJ

On 23/10/2012 10:44, mark.haynes at yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> It should be the operators care and duty to make sure they get it right when it is logged. Being a good contest operator includes logging accuracy. When the contest ends, it ends! I have a lot of respect for those that follow this methodology. The fact that you would need to change what you've logged after its over means you are not good enough at the time, to be quite honest! True competitors would accept it and live with the consequences, in my view anyway.
>
> 73,
> Mark M0DXR
>
>
>
>
> Mark Haynes
> Tel: 07917 223870
> Email: mark.haynes at yahoo.co.uk
> Skype: m0dxr_mark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris G3SJJ <g3sjj at btinternet.com>
> Sender: "UK-Contest" <uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com>
> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:35:58
> Cc: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] CQ WW webinar 21st October
>
> Bob, the actual contest, ie exchanging QSOs, might be over but it is intelligent amd mncessary to chcek through the log to corerct ant tyopos, as you
> can see by this incirrected email. Back in the days of paper logs we positevly encouraged entrants to rewrite their logs top amke sure they doidn't
> lose points uncesarily. Paper and pencil have ben replaced by a keyborad and it is wrong to assume taht someone who was adept and writing are equally
> adept at typing.
>
> I will continue to put my contest log ointo Excel when convenient and to do various sorst and cahecks. I am sure you wouldn't expaect me to always
> send emnails or write reporst etc like this one?
>
> 73 Chris G3sjj
>
>
> On 23/10/2012 08:42, Bob Henderson wrote:
>> I too have confidence in K5ZD.  He is thoughtful, has good attention to
>> detail, is a great communicator and so far as I can tell, is of the highest
>> integrity.  I cannot think of a better person to take up the reins of CQWW.
>>
>> I thought Randy's mention of the fact that logs may be resubmitted as many
>> times as wished up to the log deadline was more to do with explaining the
>> mechanics of the current mechanism.  This was apparently necessary as some
>> folks intending a single band entry had been submitting a single band log
>> and then following that with an all band log submitted for check log
>> purposes.  He was pointing out that so far as the robot is concerned the
>> last log posted against a call prevails.  So the erstwhile single band
>> entrant, unknown to himself, became an all band entrant.
>>
>> That the robot incorporates a Cabrillo integrity checker is a good thing.
>> This alerts combatants to any formatting problems requiring attention and
>> resubmission.  The principle behind the changes is intended to get us
>> closer to ensuring that contesting is over when the end bell rings.  I
>> think these efforts are to be applauded.
>>
>> 73 Bob, 5B4AGN
>>
>> On 23 October 2012 07:17, Chris Tran GM3WOJ <gm3woj at christran.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Ian GM3SEK et al
>>>
>>> You wrote :
>>>> Their own robot, which will warn about many kinds of logging errors and
>>> then will allow entrants to re-submit as many times as they wish (up to the
>>> deadline). This seems >inconsistent with their tough line about
>>> post-contest corrections... or at least, with some versions of it.
>>>
>>> If I understood correctly what K5ZD was saying, this new 'Logcheck'
>>> facility ( http://www.cqww.com/logcheck ) is for correcting errors in the
>>> structure of your Cabrillo logfile before submitting - e.g. wrong category
>>> etc, not for correcting QSO errors like callsign or zone.  I may be wrong.
>>>
>>> The Webinar is online at http://wwrof.org/webinars/**webinar/<http://wwrof.org/webinars/webinar/>and the section about Logcheck starts at 46.00 minutes approx. (The audio
>>> is not as good as the live event, but seemed to improve once the whole file
>>> had downloaded)
>>>
>>> K5ZD has only been in the job for 3 weeks so it will take him time to sort
>>> out and clarify everything, but I got a good impression of his intentions
>>> when listening to him.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Chris
>>> GM3WOJ / GM2V
>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-contest<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
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>