NO.....that kind o list..
I want to put together a list of OPs who might be available to fill in for an
absent member of "Team Antigua"(tm) V26B for 1997 and beyond. We lost two
members this year due to conflicting schedules. (KA2AEV our 40m op getting
married!) So if you have the desire to join a bunch of crazy V2 OPs for some
contest fun let me know. With the rules change for ARRL we will be more
active from the V26B Superstation. Cost are about $1000.00 USD for airfare
(depending on your point of origin) and accomodations for a week. The
following are some things to think about BEFORE you reply.
(1) you must be comfortable with rates approaching 200 per band/hour
(2) No "ego's" tolerated. We are a TEAM. Violators are taken to the old sugar
cane factory never to be heard from again.
(3) you must be able to climb or lend assistance on ground crew if needed.
(4) You must be willing to give your points to the TEAM.
Thanks for reading and I look forward to hearing from you if interested. A
station description is available from our Website at
http://www.frc-contest.org/v26b
73 es DX
de Doug // V26DX @
V26B
Frankford Radio
Club
>From k5zd@ultranet.com (Randy Thompson) Sat Sep 28 13:46:24 1996
From: k5zd@ultranet.com (Randy Thompson) (Randy Thompson)
Subject: N6AA's note
Message-ID: <01BBAD1A.FDEC5720@k5zd.ultranet.com>
I don't understand this attitude.
----------
From: Barry Kutner[SMTP:w2up@voicenet.com]
Sent: Friday, September 27, 1996 5:01 AM
To: cq-contest@tgv.com
Subject: N6AA's note
<snip>
As has been said already, if someone's gonna cheat they're gonna=20
cheat. Whether it is running power, or using packet. Or, having the=20
host at a guest op station help with equipment problems, or even=20
relieve the guest op for a little while here and there...
Since a WRTC judge-style setup is not practical, the honor system is=20
the only way to continue...
73 Barry
--
Barry Kutner, W2UP Internet: w2up@voicenet.com
Newtown, PA FRC alternate: =
barry@w2up.wells.com
=20
If we all believed this way, there wouldn't be a competition. Anyone =
could cheat -- then win -- get the trophy and top billing in the =
magazine -- and it would be OK. I don't think any of us would accept =
that or we wouldn't be contesters.
You have to draw the line somewhere. In a sport as honor driven as =
contesting, we ask a lot of our fellow competitors. This year -- some =
of them tried to take advantage of our trust and were caught. I enjoy =
contesting because I know that the other guys ahead of me are doing it =
honestly. I just wish some of them weren't so good at it!
Randy, K5ZD
=20
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D
Randy Thompson =
Amateur Radio Call Sign: K5ZD
E-mail: k5zd@ultranet.com
11 Hollis Street, Uxbridge, MA 01569
h (508) 278-2355 w (508) 337-6600
>From VK6HD@msn.com (michael bazley) Sat Sep 28 14:44:41 1996
From: VK6HD@msn.com (michael bazley) (michael bazley)
Subject: RTTY TEST
Message-ID: <UPMAIL09.199609281346000334@msn.com>
Hi All, Just after working KM9P on 40m, at 1058z, my FT1000 gave up ....a big
puff of smoke and no output. Yes I heard others from USA calling...W5KFT
599....but could do nothing... See you next year and sorry there were no 80m
Qso's. 73 es dx de VK6HD
>From cshinn@connect.net (charles d. shinn) Sat Sep 28 18:14:31 1996
From: cshinn@connect.net (charles d. shinn) (charles d. shinn)
Subject: SOA vs SO...what dilemna? LONG
Message-ID: <01BBAD25.D9D17A40@a1p47.connect.net>
On the matter of cheating. I would imagine that the following conditions =
apply:
Most serious efforts involve computers
Most serious efforts involve 1 of three or four logging programs
By definition ( if its truely that important to everyone) its easy for =
3/4
software designers to set a switch in their programs that tell
the checkers if the packet monitoring was enabled while the=20
contest log was created? Just dont tell anyone your enabling=20
this feature.Then you have the Grassy Knoll and the shooter
on film.
However, just a reminder. This is still a form of enjoyment; not war. I =
do these things for me not for you! Society finds a way to deal with =
rule breakers.Eventually they all tip their collective hands.
----------
From: BK1ZX70SFL@aol.com[SMTP:BK1ZX70SFL@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, September 27, 1996 10:39 PM
To: cq-contest@TGV.COM
Subject: SOA vs SO...what dilemna? LONG
I think W3LPL has summed it up the best - if an entrant claimed to be in =
one
category when he was a participant in another the answer to handling his
entry is simple - Disqualification.
Now for the hard part....proving this.
This is nothing new to the contest community, with computers and packet =
there
are just more efficient ways of increasing scores today than in the days =
of
the 'ole voice spotting nets. Unfortunately, for years this lieing has =
been
going on. Since it wasn't dealt with back then, it has with the aid of
high-tech digital spotting mushroomed now.
Arguements as to why so many coincidental qso's with new multipliers =
were
worked right after a spotting on packet will be answered by the cheaters =
the
same way they were before packet...."heah, I was just tuning the
band"...or...."of course I wanted to see what the commotion was that all =
the
other locals were going after."
While I don't always agree with N6AA, he is dead on this time in that a
societal/morals problem has found its way into our contesting ranks. =
Being
rewarding to "work" at making contest QSOs seems to have been =
overlooked, it
is only a final box score that is being submitted - and not much concern
exists over how it was generated. Too bad, if all it is is numbers to =
some
people I guess it really doesn't matter how they were generated.
But how do you prove someone is ease dropping? Beyond a shadow of doubt =
- or,
since we are a litiguous people, beyond threat of a law suit.
Years ago there were traps set in one of the big contests for a =
contester who
enterred s/o that was believed to be ease dropping...sure enough he went =
for
the bait...logged a Q with a station in a juicy multiplier that wasn't =
even
on the air that weekend....it had been spotted....gotcha.
Until there is a way to prove someone is ease dropping, people =
apparently
feel they can lie and get away with it. This is a sad statement about =
those
entrants...they have forgotten that the true competition in a contest is
really oneself - who did they just beat with this stunt - can they truly =
puff
up their chest and feel good about their final score on 3830 knowing =
full
well what they did? If for a second you just thought "well that's what =
W3XYZ
is doing" - STOP, and think real hard about what you're sayin'.
Maybe I'm the only one listening to those AM talk show hosts who talk =
about
the dumbing down of America, and more importantly how the values we =
embrace
are going down the tubes. Ham radio seems to be echoing society, as it
rightly should, we are indeed members of that society....too bad that =
means
there is an ingress of these bad habits/attitudes.
If we as a people can embrace a lieing politician I guess we as hams can
accept SOA ops who claim their scores as SO, huh?
NO
These guys cheated.
Don't misinterpret this, I don't mean the SOA cateogry is a bad thing, =
not at
all - it is just not the same thing as conventional SO.
I think SOA is a great class and I would not be ashamed to enter in it =
full
bore, but why do all these other guys feel they must lie about being in =
it?
If you participated as assisted just claim your score that way...it =
doesn't
hurt your club to go assisted, does it hurt you?
Is it that the liars need to feel more macho by having a bigger score =
thanks
to the packett spots and this makes them feel better? Sad.=20
Once upon a time a long time ago when NCJ was printed in MN there was an
article by W0UA about cheating which was rather good in that it pointed =
out
how sad it is that some cheaters need to feel good about themselves by =
having
others have a higher opinion of their scores. In other words (fewer of =
them)
these guys cannot form an opinion of themselves without first seeing how
their score played in the eyes of another guy.
SOA is a very interesting category, one which is ideal for part time
contesters and exciting for a clubs members...allowing them to get the =
most
bang out of the few hours they can put into the contest. SOA can enhance =
the
casual entrants' scores greatly, AKA the ops are probably having more =
thrills
per hour...and maybe operating a little longer...and we all benefit, =
great.
But SOA is not SO.=20
I return to my old definition of SO....SO is one set of gray cells =
behind the
callsign, period.
There is no need to combine the categories, there are two categories - =
with
and without assistance. How did this combining thing start...is this =
someone
hoping to justify their former trespasses?=20
If we have reached some point in technological evolution where we can =
KNOW
someone was ease dropping, we should disqualify them. =20
If we continue to be at that frustrating point where we are able to =
sense
what they are doing but cannot prove it, and these kinds of incidents =
are
increasing, lets do a gut check and remember that we as a less than
mainstream sub-hobby that needs to be self policed.
Peer pressure works. If a member in your club is doing this crap, as an
officer of the club I would hope that you felt it your duty to ask him =
to
straighten up his act so as not to soil your clubs image, what he does
reflects on others' image of your club - his actions can possibly be
tarnishing others' hard earned efforts which should sparkle.
Do the right thing....and it ain't re-writing the rules.
Jim - looking for a nice new /unique/ 4 call - K1ZX
|