Well Martin, as Michael and Hans pointed out, finding loopholes is
something different then rule breaking. Finding loopholes is using a
second, third or fourth multiplier radio when entering the Multi SINGLE
category. The rules simply state the you are allowed to use a second
transmitted signal to work mults. It doesn't say that you are not allowed
to use multiple multiplier transmitters, as long as you do not transmit
more then one signal at any given time to work a mult. Such stratagy is
fully accepted these days but it is not what the M/S category was intended
for. Thus this is a loophole that some group of contesters tried to exploit
successfully many years ago and over the years has been adopted by every
serious M/S entry there is. The same goes for SO2R and dualing CQ's. Again
not cheating by anyones standards .
Hans is probably right about one other thing. Maybe the word "loophole"
isn't correct in this matter. Maybe it's more like finding room within the
rules to get an advantage. I don't know.
I sometimes find it difficult to precisely express my opinion in the
English language since it's not my native language. Sometimes things get
lost in the translation. Maybe you feel the same from time to time, I don't
know.
Anyway, I hope I was able to make it clear that it was not my intention to
condone rule breaking.
73, Maarten PD2R
Op dinsdag 8 december 2015 heeft Martin , LU5DX <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar> het
volgende geschreven:
> Wow Maarten,
> What you say is really dangerous.
> There are loopholes everywhere in the rules.
> Rules require you to use certain level of output power to enter a
> category, but there is a loophlole, since no one is going to be able to
> verify that, according to your reasoning we are supossed to use whatever
> power level we want and then take advantage of the loophole to win a plaque?
>
> Rules requiere a person to do all the logging and operating to be
> considered a single OP, but, there is a loophole since no one is going to
> be at your place to verify that. Is that mean, we must Take advantage of
> the loophole and use the seevices of a ghost OP, so that we can confortable
> sleep at night, and still claim single OP to gain the upper hand?
>
> There are a few things that resolve loopholes of any kind: dignity,
> respect and sportsmanship.
>
> Martín LU5DX
>
>
> El dic 8, 2015 14:47, "Maarten van Rossum" <pd2r.maarten@gmail.com>
> escribió:
> >
> ....
> >
> > To me it's simple. In competition people try to find loopholes in the
> rules
> > to gain the upper hand. This happens in every sport/competation and
> > contesting is no different. This is exactly what causes us to push the
> > envelope. If I'm not mistaking, that is exactly what this hobby is all
> > about.
> >
> > Personally I think CR3L did something clever and kudos to them for
> winning
> > M/M with a M/2 set-up (if that is in fact what they did).
> >
> > If I was a member of they CR3L team I would in now way feel obligatory to
> > respond to accusations made on this reflector (even going as far
> > as comparing them with a known cheater).
> >
> > 73, Maarten PD2R
> >
> >
> > Op dinsdag 8 december 2015 heeft Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
> het
> > volgende geschreven:
> >
> > >
> > > I have no skin in this game, but if I may, a simple question, with two
> > > related follow-up questions...
> > >
> > >
> > > Did anyone ask the CR3L operators directly why they changed their entry
> > > category from M2 to MM?
> > >
> > >
> > > If so, what answer (if any) was given?
> > >
> > >
> > > And if so, was this done before or after these allegations started on
> this
> > > reflector?
> > >
> > >
> > > There's been a lot of allegations and accusations, to say nothing of
> > > jumping to conclussions on what appears to be minimal evidence... but I
> > > don't yet recall seeing anything directly or indirectly from the
> operating
> > > team or others who were part of the effort.
> > >
> > >
> > > Just asking.
> > >
> > >
> > > 73, ron w3wn
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 73, Maarten PD2R
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
--
73, Maarten PD2R
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|