Ed,
If that is true, one of you more "seasoned" ops should have been
monitoring this "newbie", who, by the way, has been licensed since the
year before I was born. Hard to claim that he's new to anything after
being licensed for 59 years. The many instances of this occurred over
several hours. Did every one who knew what they were doing leave this guy
alone at the station for hours and hours?
When did you tell him to stop it?
How much violation of the rules would you suggest be allowed? Do we not
apply the rules equally to all entrants? By what criteria? The thought
that we should allow for a 'new' contester to break the rules simply
because he didn't know better is absurd.
There was indeed suspicion of the VE3XIN<->T48K connection because of the
fantastic way in which he was able to spot you so many times (around 60),
and coincidentally just when you changed bands, or had essentially zero
rate. Now, you claim that there is no Internet in Cuba. This is totally
false. One only needs to Google the subject and find out the truth.
VE3XIN was supposed to go on this trip, but did not. Was he helping from
home in Canada? It sure looked that way.
This amazing coincidental activity between VE3XIN and T48K is what brought
the attention to your entry. You reported that he was able to know where
you were QSYing because you were announcing your new frequencies when
you'd QSY. We looked at the SDR recordings to see if that were true. Not
one occurrence of a pre-QSY announcement was found, but the numerous
instances of asking to be spotted were found as part of that
investigation.
As I clearly said before:
During this review, several instances of T48K requesting to be spotted
over the air, directly in violation of the rules were noted.
At that point, no further investigation was necessary and the
Disqualification confirmed.
That's all there is to this. To use a phrase you seem to like, anything
else is BS.
73,
Bob W5OV
CQWW Contest Committee
On Mon, April 17, 2017 3:48 pm, Ed K1EP wrote:
> This is how you welcome a new contester, you DQ him. No slack. We had a
> new contester that asked to be spotted three or four times the first time
> he was on the air. We told him not to do that and he didn't after that.
> Saying
> we communicated with another station to spot us is BS. We were in a place
> with no phone, no internet, no wifi, no satellite phone, no packet, no
> pigeons. Having someone spot you multiple times without your knowledge or
> consent is no reason to DQ. You still haven't told us how we did it.
>
> On Apr 17, 2017 4:36 PM, <w5ov@w5ov.com> wrote:
>
>
>> OK. That's enough.
>>
>>
>> There was apparent evidence of off-air communication with VE3XIN and
>> T48K
>> in approximately 60 suspicious spots of T48K.
>>
>> To confirm this and other claims of innocence, SDR recordings of T48K
>> were evaluated.
>>
>> During this review, several instances of T48K requesting to be spotted
>> over the air, directly in violation of the rules were noted.
>>
>> At that point, no further investigation was necessary and the
>> Disqualification confirmed.
>>
>>
>> Those are the key facts of the T48K DQ.
>>
>>
>> There were no hunches, feelings or other unsubstantiated reasons for
>> the T48K DQ.
>>
>>
>> No "friends" spotted anyone a few times leading to a DQ.
>>
>>
>> 73,
>> Bob W5OV
>> CQWW Contest Committee
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, April 17, 2017 1:34 pm, Ed K1EP wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 17, 2017 2:11 PM, "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It is indeed time for some rules changes. You cannot be DQing people
>>> for the actions of others that we have no control over. If you have
>>> proof of collusion or cooperation great. To tell me you can DQ me
>>> because my neighbor thought he was doing something nice and spotted me
>>> a few times is over the top.
>>>
>>>
>>> Well that is exactly what KR2Q is telling you and what he has done.
>>> He
>>> will DQ a station because others have spotted him without that
>>> station's knowledge or consent and the station has no control over or
>>> communication with the spotter.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
|