Charly,
You've got a few years on me in this game, but I have been contesting for
40 years now, so I think I've got some "cred" when I generally disagree
with your summary.
I don't think there is nearly as much cheating going on as you seem to
think and I don't think that contesting overall is tainted. It is my
opinion that the vast majority are trying to obey the rules. If they
weren't, why would anyone bother with commenting on or being concerned
about what the rules are? I think the most controversial subject of
discussion here is contest rules, and especially when suggesting making
changes to them!
Even so, there are cheaters out there and the contest adjudicators do a
remarkable job in doing what they can to find them - given that they have
very limited access to the evidence that would be needed to do a 100% job.
W7DRA offered a very good insight with his comment that cheaters must be
able to consider what they do as "right" in their own minds, and for the
life of me, I cannot imagine how they can do that. I don't understand the
motivation of a cheater. While in Lance Armstrong's cheating, he was doing
so for fame and fortune, but we don't get much of the former, and none of
the latter in amateur radio, so what their motivation is, I haven't a
clue.
So, I would say that while there are going to be bad people in contesting
like there are in all other human activities, I don't think that there is
a majority of contest participants who are cheaters. To be honest, I think
the vast majority of people who are participants in contests are only
motivated because it's fun for them and they have no expectation of ever
winning anything. Granted, there are those who apparently derive some sick
and inexplicable joy from deceiving others, but I cannot let them ruin my
enjoyment of operating a contest. I'd encourage you do enjoy it, and not
be concerned with the few "rotten apples".
73,
Bob W5OV
> I contested from 1959 to about 1990 exactly obeying the rules and
> especially really believing that all contesters were doing the same. I
> even gained a very few wins of my category or top 20 rankings. Then,
> various acquaintances began to slip around me with comments that led me to
> see that cheating was common, and often among some big scores. I think it
> is true today, and I think that some clubs encourage cheating and assist
> certain members to cheat and score big.
>
> The result has been that I still contest but my enjoyment is reduced, not
> because I am driven to win, but because I feel involved in a tainted
> activity. More often, I work, say 500, but do not bother to send in a
> log. Sending a log feels pointless. Awareness of the tainted process has
> helped me to see other taints, especially in DXCC, and to be aware and
> repulsed by the "insiders" of the hobby, the "old boy" arrangement at high
> places.
>
> I am further repulsed when I see so many widely lauding ham radio as the
> last honerable activity with the idea that when one enters the ham realm,
> one mingles with a special breed. Hams buy and sell radios in a
> remarkably
> honorable system; hams climb other ham's towers for a pizza dinner; and
> hams, otherwise strangers, stay over in each other's homes during visits.
> I wonder if I am expecting too much to have that ham spirit include
> contests, too. Also, I know honorable hams who will stick to their honest
> guns personally, but will not speak out about "others."
>
> A real characteristic of "the ham spirit" avoids openly calling a spade a
> spade. We know Italian ops are world infamous as the worst DX operators,
> for example, but we keep quiet about it publically. Maybe we need The Old
> Man back with his Rotten Radio notes. I have been surprised at how deeply
> hams want to put their heads in the sand. I have been banned from five
> ham
> reflectors for speaking my observations about everything from the CW
> Skimmer to how a well-loved radio model is not better than sliced bread.
> I
> may be banned from cq-contest, now.
>
> My answer to your question, NO, I AM NOT OK WITH THAT.
>
> Charly, K4VUD
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 1:32 AM, Michael Adams <mda@n1en.org> wrote:
>
>> Doug KR2Q asks:
>>
>> > "Are you OK with that?"
>>
>>
>> I'm answering here from the viewpoint of a relative newcomer to amateur
>> radio, one who enjoys contesting but has no real delusions of being a
>> "serious" competitor.
>>
>> One of the reasons I fell into amateur radio so deeply, so quickly, is
>> that
>> I was tired of being bothered by "stuff" in other pastimes. For
>> example,
>> I used to maintain a website for a different hobby, and I just got sick
>> of
>> being bothered by working around the virtual canine landmines of spam
>> and
>> advertising or in trying to keep with the latest developments. It used
>> to
>> be fun to me....but it's not anymore.
>>
>> While it's possible to be exposed in amateur radio to some of the same
>> general kinds of frustrations I've had with other pastimes... really,
>> it's
>> just kind of relaxing to let some time go by -- me, the transceiver, a
>> set
>> of paddles, and a wire or two -- and see who, or what, I can find on the
>> bands.
>>
>> Sure, I can see the appeal of walnut and wallpaper, and I wouldn't mind
>> having some to decorate the shack....but when I'm contesting, it's just
>> an
>> extension of finding relaxation in seeing who/what is on. I'm a little
>> pistol, playing without a real expectation of winning, just for the fun
>> of
>> it. Scores and rankings don't necessarily matter given my simple
>> goals,
>> but they do add a bit of interest to the discussion surrounding the
>> contest, to extend the enjoyment of a particularly fun weekend, or to
>> whet
>> interest in an upcoming test.
>>
>> So, am I OK with cheating? No, not really. But as long as there's
>> some
>> space for me to be able to play, as long as there is enough activity to
>> hold my interest, I refuse to be too bothered by it. Why spoil
>> something
>> that I enjoy by stressing over other people doing things I can't
>> control?
>>
>> I'm not opposed to anti-cheating measures, because I respect that the
>> competition is a big deal to some. I just ask that those measures not
>> be
>> too onerous on the more casual participants.
>>
>> --
>> *Michael D. Adams* (N1EN)
>> Poquonock, Connecticut | mda@n1en.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Charly, HS0ZCW
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|