[UK-CONTEST] CQ WW webinar 21st October

Nubsey nubsey at ntlworld.com
Tue Oct 23 12:37:34 EDT 2012 

>From what I gather the rule states
 And I quote . Post-contest correcting of call signs by using any database, 
recordings or confirming QSO's is not allowed

 So if I am doing single band 20m say. As long as I edit my log before 2359 
thats ok. As I doubt if I will be working much at that time of night. And 
the contest is still running so it is not post contest.

 Nubsey G0VDZ
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roger Western" <g3sxw at btinternet.com>
To: "Contest Reflector UK" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] CQ WW webinar 21st October


> The VooDoo Contest Group has always eye-balled the log before submission 
> looking for impossible calls eg SXWG3 or G3. No (that's *NO*) other 
> post-contest log-massaging has ever been done.
>
> Now, with this new rule we will not even do this.
>
> Roolz izz roolz!
> 73 de Roger/G3SXW.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Chris G3SJJ
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:12 PM
> Cc: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] CQ WW webinar 21st October
>
> I didn't say that Bob. If I don't like the rules I won't submit a log, I 
> can still make some QSOs though and I would still run them through Excel,
> like I and others have done over many years.
>
> It would be interesting to get a comment from the multi-op groups. I am 
> aware that it is an established task in the UK to do very detailed
> post-contest logs and change callsigns, serial numbers, zones etc to 
> minimse points loss. Also, wait until close to the deadline before 
> submitting an
> entry. There appears to be some pots calling the kettle black here!!
>
> Chris G3SJJ
>
>
> On 23/10/2012 13:16, Bob Henderson wrote:
>> Chris
>>
>> We all have freedom to decide but you should expect neither sympathy nor
>> respect for your "I'll abide by rules when it suits me" position.
>>
>> Bob, 5B4AGN
>>
>> On 23 October 2012 11:33, Chris G3SJJ <g3sjj at btinternet.com> wrote:
>> snip
>>
>>> Sorry but no-one is going to dictate to me how I should run my life.
>>> Amateur radio is a hobby.
>>>
>>> snip
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23/10/2012 12:09, Bob Henderson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well Chris.  I guess this largely depends upon your definition of a 
>>>> typo.
>>>> Your log should reflect the exchange you sent during the QSO.  If you 
>>>> know
>>>> at the time you have logged something different to that sent, you can 
>>>> edit
>>>> it on the fly or keep a written note to provide for correction of the 
>>>> typo
>>>> before the log is sent in.  There is 5 days between the end of the 
>>>> event
>>>> and the log submission deadline.  Surely you don't make so many such
>>>> errors
>>>> this isn't enough time?
>>>>
>>>> When you put your log into Excel and do your various checks, which 
>>>> reveal
>>>> what you believe to be a typo, how can you be sure what you have found 
>>>> is
>>>> indeed a typo and not a busted call?  If it is a typo then correcting 
>>>> it
>>>> would make it consistent with what you sent.  If it's a busted call 
>>>> then
>>>> editing it would render your log inconsistent with the exchange which 
>>>> took
>>>> place.  If for example you have logged DL2SS on five bands and  DF2HS 
>>>> on
>>>> the missing sixth, how would you determine after the event that DF2HS 
>>>> is a
>>>> typo which should be corrected to DF2SS?  You might have sent DF2HS 
>>>> albeit
>>>> you worked DF2SS.  This would be a busted call and editing it would 
>>>> render
>>>> your log inconsistent with the exchange sent.
>>>>
>>>> The ban on post contest log editing is quite recent.  Lawrence, I very
>>>> much
>>>> doubt US contesters are more principled in their avoidance of post 
>>>> event
>>>> editing.  Such considerations are anyway academic, as the rules for 
>>>> CQWW
>>>> now specifically prohibit any post event log laundering process.
>>>>
>>>> When rules are silent on the matter of log laundering, nobody can be
>>>> blamed
>>>> for seizing the opportunity to engage in it.  When the rules are clear
>>>> then
>>>> they should be adhered to.  Simple stuff.  I am personally delighted by
>>>> this initiative.  I always have better things to do than spend my time
>>>> farting around with contest logs.  End of contest and in the mail does 
>>>> it
>>>> for me.  If I lose a few points due to typos that's fine.  Other
>>>> competitors share the same exposure.
>>>>
>>>> On a final note.  The suggestion keyboard skills are not contesting is 
>>>> not
>>>> credible.  They became part of contesting as soon as you chose to use 
>>>> your
>>>> computer for logging.  To me this is akin to going back to the 70's and
>>>> disowning errors made using a bug key on the grounds that poor skill in
>>>> operating a bug don't in anyway undermine your knowledge of the code. 
>>>> If
>>>> it's a skill you use when contesting, it's a contest skill.
>>>>
>>>> 73 Bob, 5B4AGN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 23 October 2012 09:35, Chris G3SJJ <g3sjj at btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   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/>
>>>>>>> <http://wwrof.org/**webinars/**webinar/<http://wwrof.org/webinars/**webinar/>
>>>>>>> <http://wwrof.org/**webinars/**webinar/<http://wwrof.org/**webinars/webinar/>
>>>>>>> <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>
>>>>>>> <**http://lists.contesting.com/****mailman/listinfo/uk-contest<http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-contest>
>>>>>>> <ht**tp://lists.contesting.**com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-**contest<http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-contest>
>>>>>>> <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<http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-contest>
>>>>>> <ht**tp://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<http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/uk-contest>
>>>>> <ht**tp://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<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<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

More information about the UK-Contest mailing list