On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 05:57:24PM +0300, Kostas Stamatis wrote:
> There is no need of all these. Just publish the logs before the final
> results and let the competitors to make objection showing cheaters' logs. DQ
> some of them and all will be good.
Since we are dancing around the details... it seems to me that there are
a few particular methods of cheating that could be difficult to detect
even from log inspection:
* Excessive power: Sort of obvious why this is difficult to detect from
log analysis. I imagine this happens at all levels of competition from
the QRP entrant running 100W to the SOHP entrant using an amplifier with
a pair of 8877s.
* Passive use of a spotting network in a single operator category:
Lots of people who cheat in this manner inadvertently do things that
can be detected through log analysis - but probably not everyone.
* Extra help: A station enters as a single operator, but has another person
operating while they go off to eat, sleep, etc. This would be obvious
on phone where you would hear different voices, but maybe not on CW or
RTTY.
Those are just some of the issues. Until now, there's been no effective
effort, other than peer pressure, to push back against these forms of
cheating outside of WRTC. And we've even seen one log at WRTC 2006 with
"irregularities" (although in that case, it was discovered through log
analysis). If the CQWW committee can persuade some retired contesters
to volunteer their time and energy to help fight back, maybe it's worth
a try.
--
Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
kenharker@kenharker.com
http://www.kenharker.com/
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|