CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC Entry Reclassified to High Power

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC Entry Reclassified to High Power
From: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
Reply-to: Igor Sokolov <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:51:50 +0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I am not going to be on any side of the argument. But we all know that power cheating exists and proliferates. It has become especially acute after the introduction of the new WRTC selection rules which allowed LP category compete against HP for the slot in WRTC.

IMHO RDXC should be commended for pioneering the battle against power violations even though their attempt is not fully approved by some.

RDXC can be criticized for their approach but can critics offer other reliable methods of fishing out power violators. I do not think that a 100% reliable method exists. Does it mean that contest community should not pay attention to power violations? I do not think so. Otherwise, why have different power categories in the rules when these rules cannot be enforced.

The simple solution would be to drop separation by power and have all the participants compete in one power category. But would such a radical step be to the benefit of the contest community? Would it increase participation? I think not. Then why don't we as a community use this precedent and try to find a solution? Let's work out methods of verification of power cheating that would be acceptable by a majority of the participants. This will be to the benefit of all the contest sponsors where power categories exist.

Disclaimer: I have no relation to RDXC committee and not competing for slot in WRTC. I just like the art contesting and want make better.

73, Igor UA9CDC
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>