Turn off packet. Do not allow use of computers or computer programs.
No super check partial files should be compiled. All logging should
be via paper logs and with an ink pen. No transceivers only
separates.
Ok, embrace technology and use it wisely. Remember it is only a
hobby. Have fun in your amateur radio activities and don't take it or
yourself so seriously.
On Dec 13, 2007 11:43 AM, Mike Fatchett W0MU <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:
> Why should the clusters be turned off? There are legal classes for packet.
> I think packet allows a great number of non serious hams to get in the
> contest and work new countries and make contacts that they might not
> otherwise.
>
> The problem is not with the technology or packet it is with the cheating
> operators. If we take a more authoritative stance and start outing the
> cheaters and getting them DQed would be a great start.
>
> Prior to packet there were 2m spotting nets. I am sure everyone turned off
> their 2m rigs during the contest right??!! The use of spotting nets is even
> more difficult to track than packet.
>
> The cheating is not just limited to packet. Plenty of stations abuse the
> power limits, HP, LP or QRP. How about multiple signals per band and after
> contest log massaging and adding in all your friends calls to your log
> whether you worked them or not.
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dick-w0raa [mailto:w0raa@comcast.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:50 AM
> To: Mike Fatchett W0MU
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Why not turn off the clusters during contests?
>
> Has anybody given thought to asking the people who own/operate the various
> clusters, to voluntarily shut them down during contest periods? What did we
>
> do before there were clusters and packet? We fouind stations to work, the
> old fashioned way. We turned the knob and looked for them. God forbid we
> should have to do that today. What a horrible thought.
>
> So, why not just get all of them to voluntarily turn them off at the onset
> of a contest and then turn them back on at the end of the contest? I think
> it's doable, so why not do it? Then we'd find out if these big gun winners
> are as big gunned as they claim to be. It's certainly worth considering.
>
> Also, all contests should be limited to 100 watts. Now there's where the
> cheating would go. Cheaters would be saying: "Me, more than 100 watts? Not
> me, I follow the rules!"
>
> Dick
> W0RAA
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Fatchett W0MU" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
> To: "Randy Thompson" <k5zd@charter.net>; "Untitled"
> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 4:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
>
>
> > Assisted seems to have less competitors which translates to higher
> > finishes...
> >
> > I most cases if you are chasing spots you are probably not winning. Run
> > run
> > run run run.
> >
> >
> > On 12/12/07 4:37 PM, "Randy Thompson" <k5zd@charter.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Because some of us still like to do things the old fashioned way. All by
> >> ourselves! And we like the fact that we can compete in a category with
> >> other people who feel the same way. Even makes it more fun when we can
> >> beat
> >> the packet assisted guys.
> >>
> >> I am against combining them because I like to be recognized as a guy who
> >> knows how to operate.
> >>
> >> I wouldn't mind if they were combined because then all the SOA guys who
> >> think they are competitive will realize that packet does not a winning
> >> score
> >> make.
> >>
> >> Randy, K5ZD
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> >>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Yuri VE3DZ
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 7:08 PM
> >>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> >>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
> >>>
> >>> I don't like Dx Cluster, but the reality is - like it or not
> >>> - almost everyone is using it nowadays, one way or another. I
> >>> mean 99.9 % of the HAM stations have the capability of using
> >>> Dx Cluster today.
> >>> So, why not just allow it for all categories, like it was
> >>> done for WAE or Russian DX long time ago?
> >>>
> >>> What are we afraid of here?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yuri VE3DZ
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
--
Tnx es 73
Dick W7ZR
www.w7zr.com
Tact is the ability to describe others as they see themselves
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|