Mike,
I agree that RDXC approach to adjudication of logs should have been
described in the rules. Having said that I do not know of any other
contest sponsors who publish their methods of adjudication in contest
rules.
Let me also tell you that not awarding points for QSO where one of the
logs is missing for cross checking allows to avoid situations with log
padding that we have recently encountered in CQWW.
73, Igor UA9CDC
2016-10-06 6:28 GMT+05:00 W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com
<mailto:w0mu@w0mu.com>>:
The rules do not state that if a log is not sent in that QSO's
will be tossed out. If this is what they mean then they have
failed to state it. If I missed this in the rules my apologies.
*16.* Penalties are counted as tripled good QSO points.
* QSO is penalized for the following:
o incorrectly logged calls (Bad Call)
o incorrectly logged exchange numbers
o QSO is not present in the other station log (NIL)
* QSO neither counted nor penalized for the following:
o other station incorrectly logged entrant's call
o other station incorrectly logged entrant's exchange number
o QSO time in entrant's log and other station's log difference is
more than 3 minutes (except systematic computer errors)
o QSO bands or modes in entrant's log and other station's log
differ.
o dupe QSO which is not in the other station's log.
Maybe we are having an English/Russian translation issue Igor.
I do
not know what would happen in WRTC I were to work a station that
nobody else worked for a rare multiplier.
I have no problem penalizing both sides of the QSO. Both sides of
the QSO can be sent back and confirmed if necessary. I was
curious why I was seeing such large score reductions. Now I know why.
I think it is odd to penalize people if other people did not send
in their logs as that is completely out of the participants
control. Why would this rule be in place? The organizers felt that
logs were submitted that were not fair representations of what
actually happened on the airwaves? A bit of log manipulation,
padding the score here and there? We have seen this quite a bit
lately, so it would not be a big surprise.
I think this idea could actually work is all entrants were
required to sign up 48 hours prior to the event. 24 hours from
the event a list of entrants would be made available so that you
could update your software to alert you to stations not in the
contest and you could choose to work them or not. It still would
not solve the issue where someone fails to send in a log but if
someone took the time to sign up they probably would send in a log
and the organizers would have an email address to ask for it in
the case they forgot, etc.
Radio contests are one of the few sports or maybe the only sport
where the competition/participants are unknown until the contest
begins and sometimes not until the end or when results are
published. The number of participants is unknown and variable
over the entire contest period.
On 10/5/2016 12:48 PM, Igor Sokolov wrote:
Drew,
This subject has been discussed here on the reflector in the
past and reasons were explained.
I will briefly repete them.
There are two schools of thoughts. Both have some merits and
faults
1) Assumed that sender makes no errors (which is not always
right) and all the errors are on the receiving side.
Therefore sender is always awarded points for the QSO and
receiver gets all the punishment. The down side of this
approach is that even in cases when sender knows that receiver
got one of the letters in the call sign wrong, the sender is
not motivated to waist time and correct the receiver.
2) QSO is a team work where team consist of sender and
receiver. The purpose is to relay correct information (contest
exchange) from one to another. If this team failed to do it
both team mates get punishment. The down side of this approach
is that sender has very limited control over what the receiver
gets and put down in the log.
Most of Russian contest (both internal and international)
adopted the second approach because they see contest as
message handling.
Therefore if log of one of the particular QSO team mates is
missing, it becomes impossible to verify this QSO and
therefore points are not awarded. I hope it explains some of
the issues raised here but I also agree that it would be
better if this approach is explained in contest rules.
I personally was always a supporter of the first approach
despite of its shortcomings. But still ready to play whatever
the approach is as long as number of participants guarantee
interesting and lively event.
BTW if during WRTC contest some of the participants would find
a rare mult who is not really participating in the contest and
talk him to giving 001 for the log (or just put 001 in the
log) then will this QSO be counted. Just curious.
73, Igor UA9CDC