None of this proves anything. You can be logged in, having the cluster
send you spots, and not display them on your screen by selecting the
appropriate class in CT or NA (TR?).
The bottom line is that we have to trust everyone to follow the rules.
Packet cheating, like most other, can be done in degrees and you probably
wont get caught unless you've got the burner on High! I think most of us
feel that if we have to cheat to any degree to win, it's just not worth
it...an empty victory.
73, Ty K3MM
To: contest reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
cc: (bcc: Tyler G Stewart/BENN/CEC)
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Contest Ethics - A Case Study?
>
> >* Entered as Single Operator (indicating they did not use
> >PacketCluster): WB8RNY, W0VFO, K2MP, N9PQU
>
> If they only used the cluster to send spots (others, not themselves),
> and not read spots, then this (I think) is legal. Most (all?) of
> your examples, however, seem to be begging for mults/spotting
> themselves.
>
I regularly connect to the cluster while single-op, but I immediately send
the SHOW/NODX command to turn off any spots coming my way. That way I can
send out spots and support the assisted guys. After *I* work 'em, of
course :-)
Similarly, if you're running single-band, just turn off spots on that
band.
What we REALLY need here is a log from the node of the operating mode of
each connectee. This won't stop the "packet pirates" from lurking and
watching for spots, though. We have a couple of prime perpetrators of
this sort up here in Seattle...they're a lot easier to catch in the act
than they must think they are...
Come to think of it...a careful examination of the perp's log against the
node's spot *input time* would show a fairly strong correlation. Enough
for a well-placed DQ from time to time...
73, Ward N0AX
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|