>>> Actually Pete, that is very smart of them.
Actually it isn't smart, it might be if their method had been a proven one
but, as we have seen from Bob's experience the evidence offered was based upon
RBN reports which is not an exact science when comparing the signals of one stn
against another for reasons previous posters in this thread have explained.
The issue here has been the failure of RDXC to discuss the matter further with
Bob when he presented more detailed RBN data. As hams making regular faceless
contacts with other hams over many years all that we have to cherish is our
reputations with our peers. An accusation of being a suspected cheater is a
severe body blow. Whomsoever levels that accusation has a duty to see the
matter through by full discussion. Any accused person in any sphere of life
should have the right to defend themselves, a right that Bob has been denied.
It is not OK to say that all suspected cheaters are treated the same. The
analogy of drowning Witches drawn by Kelly is an apt one, maligning the many
innocent to catch the few guilty ( and they will never know who were actually
guilty) is not the way to do it.
It is unfortunately the case that short of actually attending the qth of the
suspect at the time, there is no way of proving power cheating but we have to
live with that rather than making judgements based upon suspicion alone.
Igor's solution of one power level would solve the angst of RDXC of QRP & LP
power cheats but would not find any favour with the many QRP & LP operators who
would opt out. Another aspect, if RDXC are really intent upon conquering power
cheating how will they tackle the power cheats who exceed the permitted power
of their licences? Compared to those suspects the number of QRP & LP
deliberate cheaters is minuscule.
In short RDXC policy is flawed and unacceptable in it's unfairness and unless
revised, as I commented previously, should be withdrawn from the WRTC
qualifying events.
73 Brian 5B4AIZ / C4Z.
From: Zoli Pitman HA1AG via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Sent: Wednesday, 5 October 2016, 21:30
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC Entry Reclassified to High Power
On 10/5/2016 16:20, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
> They appear to be deliberately concealing their methodology - shame on
> them!
Actually Pete, that is very smart of them.
They should not reveal their methods to suspected cheaters. It would
only help to avoid detection next time.
73, Zoli HA1AG
_______________________________________________
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
|