[UK-CONTEST] What's the point?

[Roger Western]

Again, Read The Flipping Manual:

"If you are certain that this is a logging error, AND that what you logged 
does not match what you actually sent, then make the correction".

If you did not actually send the other guy's call-sign at all then there is 
no mis-match between what you sent and what you logged. So, it is OK to make 
the change.

Let's stop trying to unpick every comma and semi-colon. The intention is 
clear: we may NOT make post-contest changes with any outside assistance, 
only with your own information: no data-bases, no recordings etc.
73 de Roger/G3SXW.



-----Original Message----- 
From: GORDON BROWN
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 5:44 PM
To: uk-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] What's the point?

Bob.  The trouble is that I could work you and send HB4AGN  in error but
correctly log you as 5B4AGN.  Listening to an SDR recording of our QSO
would suggest I corrected the log afterwards but in fact it was my poor CW.
You knew I meant 5B4, i knew I meant 5B4 so all's well.
Also.
If I hear you working a pile-up, as you do,  I just send my callsign and,
if I'm lucky, I get a QSO but put it in my log as HB4AGN.  If I later
correct call and edit my log who is to know except me?  I didn't send your
call at all, you knew I was calling you and so did I.
73
Gordon G3MZV


On 23 October 2012 16:33, Bob Henderson <bob at 5b4agn.net> wrote:

> Ken
>
> CQ now have seven SDR monitoring sites located around the world.  Each
> apparently has the capacity to record all activity across all six HF
> contest bands during the full 48 hours of a contest.
>
> This does not mean every line of each submitted log will be compared
> against the recordings made.
>
> What it does mean is CQ have the ability to interrogate these recordings
> where unanswered questions arise relating to logs from entrants in
> contention for an award.  If for example, the committee suspects an 
> entrant
> has corrected busted calls after the event, they now have the means to
> check it out.
>
> Bob, 5B4AGN
>
> On 23 October 2012 15:09, Ken <ken.g3lvp at btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > Today it's only one small step from "checking" for "typos" to running
> > programs to search for QSO's made on different bands in the same 
> > contest,
> > previous logs, databases,  QRZ.com etc. This may give a good idea
> whether a
> > callsign has been entered correctly or has been misread or mis-typed,
> this
> > particularly applies to 'uniques'.
> >
> > The same applies to checking & correcting locators in RSGB VHF contests
> > especially when scores claimed by others can be examined. Making changes
> to
> > an entry should not be permitted once it has been submitted as they can
> at
> > present.
> >
> > Since meaningful signal reports on HF have been abandoned for universal
> > 59(9')'s the only part of may contest exchanges that (probably) can't be
> > checked post contest is the serial number and even this doesn't apply to
> > CQWW or ARRL DX contests when serial numbers aren't exchanged.
> >
> > This is despite RSGB VHF (but not HF?) ruleswhich state that "All
> > information must be copied off air at the time of the QSO and on the 
> > band
> > in use and databases must not be used to fill in missing information and
> > for CQWW " Post-contest correcting of call signs by using any database,
> > recordings or confirming QSO's is not allowed", how the adjudicators of
> > contests know that these (and other) rules are adhered to is a mystery 
> > to
> > me.
> >
> > So what's the point of adjudicating on the basis of callsigns (&
> locators)
> > when in many cases it's possible check & correct these after the
> contest? A
> > log with few or no errors in all probability has been subject to some
> level
> > of post contest checking whatever the rules say.
> >
> > Anti-contesters might just say what's the point?
> >
> > 73...
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > G3LVp
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**----------
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > 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