They have already moved to confirming both sides: recordings. Now that
recordings are mandatory for the big guns, if you are serious about your score
you don’t have any choice but to record.
What needs to happen (if the contest sponsors are serious about accuracy) is to
send LCRs prior to the results being posted and allow stations to cross check
the LCR with the recordings. If the receiving station can prove that the data
copied was indeed what was sent then no penalty to the receiver. Then the
penalty can be assessed against the sender.
Lots more work for the sponsor. But if everyone is serious about accuracy it
will need to be done.
Ken K6MR
From: ac0w@charter.net<mailto:ac0w@charter.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 19:15
To: 'cq-contest@contesting.com'<mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Additional Penalty
Ed,
Your very last line points to a key critical element "a successful two
way QSO". A successful two way QSO requires both a sending station to
accurately send and record that information along with a receiving
station to accurately receive and record that information. There are
plenty of times when then sending station either inaccurately sends
information or inaccurately records the information sent while the
receiving station accurately records that information. Because the
information in the two logs do not match and the receiving station is
assumed guilty and penalized despite the sending station being the
guilty party.
To make matters worse for the innocent receiving station that is
penalized, the guilty sending station gets to receive credit for the
QSO.
This is where I have the issue of a penality, the station the caused
the error is not always the one that gets the penalty. Now I don't
have the solution on how to properly penalize the station making the
error, to me it is just morally wrong to assume people are guilty and
penalize them for what sometimes is an error by someone else.
Now maybe some other old timers will remember this (guess I fit that
group) some contests use to have in their rules the reason a QSO was
worth 2 points. 1 point was for accurately sending the information and
1 point was for accurately receiving the information. I'm suspect this
was dropped at some point in time when they realized there is no way
to determine if the information was accurately sent or not.
I'm fine with a penalty as long as the proper station is penalized.
Until then we need to return to what our legal system is based on,
"innocent until proven guilty".
BillAC0W
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 08:36:14 -0700
From: "Ed Muns"
To: "'CQ-Contest'"
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Additional Penalty
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Not every contest imposes penalties on incorrectly logged QSOs,
beyond
losing credit for the QSO. Contests that do impose penalties are
simply
requiring higher accuracy, in balance with speed and quantity. It's
just a
rule.
Radiosport is unique compared to basketball, baseball, bowling and
most all
sports because competitors must work together as a team to complete a
successful two-way QSO with each other.
Ed W0YK
_________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
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
|