One solution is to design the contest such that undetected
cheating is impossible. Like what N6TR and company did with
the internet sprint. Here is a contest that doesn't have
the problem:
1. Part of the transmitted exchange is computed from the
station's log book at the time of the QSO (like the
previous name in INT or serial numbers). I suggest a
two or three digit hash computed from all existing
callsigns and received exchanges in the log. This
piece of the exchange is sort of like a serial
number--it changes with each QSO--but looks like a
random sequence to anyone that can't see the entire
log. Using letters A-Z and digits 0-9 for the hash
and making it two characters long should makes
for 1000+ combinations making it pretty much
impossible to edit a QSO without changing
the value for 99.9% of all subsequent QSOs.
The log checker would be able to compute the hash
as well, of course.
2. Any QSO that is not identical in BOTH logs
is lost in BOTH logs.
3. The problem of stations that can't send their
own callsigns without error can be addressed by
adding another character or two as a checksum for
my own callsign. This one doesn't change with each
QSO. I can instantly detect I have incorrectly
copied your callsign, so I ask you to send it
again. Because of rule #2 BOTH of us have to
repeat until its right.
Don't think this has to make contest unwieldy, either.
In CQWW CW you can drop the 599 and replace it with
the coded has and make the exchange exactly the same
length as it is now. Then drop the zone number from
the exchange--everybody will use a database anyway--
(no, I'm not really serious here) and it gets even
shorter--records should go UP of course!
Wayne, W5XD
w5xd@alum.mit.edu
I wonder my postings to cq-contest get there with no
subject or return email address???
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|