Jorge,
You are correct. I no longer do competitive single op efforts. If I
did, having spent the time and money to build a competitive station, I
certainly would learn the rules and comply with them. The CC doesn't
have to tell Marcelo what they are looking for. All they need to do is
say (as they did), "we would like the audio you are required to have."
For all we know, if he provided the audio, as required by the rules,
they would review it and say everything is good.
Keeping suspicions private is a good thing. The more the CC reveals,
the more info cheaters have to stay one step ahead and circumvent the rules.
Barry W2UP
On 3/4/2017 16:47, Jorge Diez - CX6VM wrote:
Barry
if you are not at K0RF, as single op you did very few hours of CQWW
SSB in the last years, so is easy to you to say if you don´t like the
rules, don´t play the game.
Marcelo is building the best contest station in CX and he sit at the
chair and spend a whole contest alone. I don´t like the rules, so he
and me as many others will not follow your advice.
The others that write here, told that W4PA don´t say the reason they
asked for the audio. This bad communication from W4PA is what makes us
to don´t know if they disqualified him because he did not have the
audio or for suspicions of lying.
from other CC member, I know is not only because he did not have the
audio, they have suspicious of lying. Anyway, never told Marcelo what
was the suspicious, if working 25 multipliers in 1 minute or working
AAA0A that was spotted or whatever.
So to finish that:
- he was reclassified because they have suspicions about the log. So
for someone here that have this same dude, it was not just for not
having the audio. Unfortunately he not recorded the contest. (I
didn't record the contest also)
- In case he recorded the contest, I don't think the recording will
help the operator. CC will tell you that because of the audio, seems
he was very fast going from one station to another, but you can do
that in many other ways that are not necessarily the cluster
73,
Jorge
CX6VM/CW5W
2017-03-04 12:36 GMT-03:00 Barry <w2up@comcast.net
<mailto:w2up@comcast.net>>:
*XIII. DECLARATION:*
By submitting a CQ WW DX Contest log, and in consideration of the
efforts of the CQ WW DX Contest Committee to review and evaluate
that log, an entrant unconditionally and irrevocably agrees that
he/she has: 1) read and understood the rules of the contest and
agrees to be bound by them, 2) operated according to all rules and
regulations that pertain to amateur radio for the station
location, 3) agreed the log entry may be made open to the public,
and *4) accepted that the issuing of disqualifications and other
decisions of the Committee are official and final. If an entrant
is unwilling or unable to agree to all of the foregoing, the
entrant should not submit the entry or submit the entry as a
Checklog only.
*
If you don't like the rules, don't play the game. (Bold added.)
Barry W2UP
On 3/4/2017 08:27, Rudy Bakalov wrote:
There will be a lot less frustration vented out here if the
process was principled and transparent; it is not. I am not
referring to the mechanics of how cheating is detected.
There seem to be no principles around how to handle suspected
behavior. Only a few weeks ago we learned about the extensive
dialogue between the committee and 3V8SS. Now, there is zero
dialogue between the two sides, only a request for the
recording. In other instances RBN data was being used as a
reason to suspect abuse of power even though such procedures
are not disclosed upfront in the published rules.
Why do we care about principles? Because the rules will never
cover all situations and circumstances. Principles, just like
the constitution, guide us how to make decisions when the
rules are incomplete or do not exist.
I also believe that everybody deserves a fair trial, including
by its peers. CX2DK, 3V8SS, LZ2RS, etc. have every right to
bring up their complaints to the public and ask the judges to
explain themselves. Democracy 101.
Rudy N2WQ
Sent using a tiny keyboard. Please excuse brevity, typos, or
inappropriate autocorrect.
On Mar 4, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Barry <w2up@comcast.net
<mailto:w2up@comcast.net>> wrote:
Fact not in evidence.
Again, they don't ask for audio unless they have
suspicions about the log. Apparently same concern, last
year, no response. They let it go. You know the old
saying - Fool me once shame on you; fool me twice, shame
on me.
Barry W2UP
On 3/4/2017 06:04, Rudy Bakalov via CQ-Contest wrote:
So in both instances, the log checker didn't have
issues with the log, but requested the recording
anyway. W4PA didn't mention any issues either and
only reiterated that they asked for the recording and
didn't get it.
Rudy N2WQ
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
<https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>
--
73,
Jorge
CX6VM/CW5W
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|