Dear David,
Thank you very much for this mail
I like to tell you letter from UA6LV is just way to support you
We like what you doing and appreciate your time and energy you spending on
checking logs
On the same time I know its very very true what that people is say
You know score reduced by 500 qsos but he still have high result and thats
not correct
I have complain from some DX whenever they are say that they are didnt work
the station and then see that they are in the log of that one
On the same time score is not reduced with simple reason that DX station is
dont send log and there is nothing WT4I can do with it
Im personnally very sure that DQ is needed and need to be published because
today whats happen people who cheating using cluster putting calls in the
log and etc etc what kind of the risk they are have? Max their log will be
not in results and thats it otherwise they are can become winners
Im sorry David but saying that many of the subscribers receive letters from
you saying that they are do something wrong is not correct because most of
the contesters is following rules and dont do anything wrong
DQ LIST NEED TO BE PUBLISHED
If you need any help to check log, send letters to DX station asking them
if really they are have qso with the guy or not you have offer from UA6LV
group and you can be sure many others will be happy to help and support
contest
CQ WW 160m is GREAT CONTEST WE LIKE IT AND IM SURE WE WILL SUPPORT IT
73 Al 4L5A
> The CQ 160 Contests are checked very closely. Much more so now than
> before
> e-logs.
>
> All e-logs are put in cabrillo format if not sent that way originally.
> Since so many try to jomebrew a cabrillo log or run the log thru an editor
> I
> have to run all 2200 (2005 numbers) thru a dry run just to assure the log
> is
> clean and in good format.
>
> All logs are run through the WT4I master call sign data base program
> building a master file for both CW or SSB. Then all logs are run through
> the cross check master and I find this is far better than the old hand
> cross
> check. VU2BGS did submit a log with 15 valid contacts. His call is near
> the top of the list for NIL with 51 entries. In fact many complain that
> their score was reduced too much. This is because of the accuracy of the
> cross checker.
>
> The WT4I log checker indicates where a busted call (thus now a NIL) is
> different from a unique. Since the average number of uniques is about 1%
> a
> check is placed on all logs reaching 3% uniques. Above 7% uniques can
> mean
> disqualification. The exception report allows the director to review
> these
> logs and make decisions just as we did 15 years ago. I have continued
> N4IN's tradition of DQing stations in private (the score just disappear)
> and
> have done so 9 times since 1992. I have written over 50 warning letters
> and
> I know many on the cq-contest reflector have gotten them. I do point out
> bad practice in print and know its being read as several have sent me
> letters in protest..
>
> The contest has grown in just the past several years from 900 logs to over
> 2200 logs received. Do bad logs get rough...probably but I keep setting
> more traps for the exception report to look at each year.
>
> The idea the contest logs are not checked is just no true.
>
> Dave K4JRB CQ 160 Contests Director
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|