Speak Out: DQ for cheating?
A reader wonders "After a study of the logs, several non-assisted entrants in the year 2000 running of CQWW were determined to have actually been using packet. What do you think about this and the CQWW committee's decision to allow these suspected packet cheaters to withdraw the logs instead of being disqualified?"
36 opinions on this subject.
Enter your opinion at the bottom of this page.
[Speak Out Home Page]
WI2T on 2002-02-12
If it's proven DQ the turkeys and publish the call!!! This is suppose to be fun. Why would you want to cheat while having fun. If it is so important that one feels he must cheat, I think it's time for him to re-think his priorities in life.
AB7RG on 2002-02-12
DQ if you can prove that there was cheating going on.
Good grief, what are these ops thinking? Does it really make you feel good to do "good" by cheating? What has one really accomplished by cheating? When I used to race professional motocross I never would have even considered cheating. I turned in the one guy who did cut the track, and he was DQ'ed. In all of my races this only happened once that I know of. Hopefully Amateurs are as honest in competition too.
73 Clinton AB7RG
DJ9AO on 2002-02-11
I don't know how this was proven. If there is an evidence it would be right to show the calls. Everything in the contest-rules is a kind of trust. For that it is necessary to keep the rules up. And isn't it a hint for cheating if people agree with a withdraw?
W0YR on 2002-02-11
What is the difference between DQ for cheating and the scorers of the contest accusing you of cheating if you have unique calls in your contest log? Yesterday, in the RTTY WPX test, I am sure some of the bumble-fingered dabblers only made one of two QSOs in the fast-paced RTTY test. Yet I will be accused of cheating and the contacts subtracted. We are being subjected to punishment without proof and I for one greatly resent being cast as dishonest because of the sins of a few others. This whole area needs rethinking.
k4xs on 2002-02-10
How was it "proven"? Suspicion is not the same as proof. If the "proof" is there, DQ is necessary. Print the calls of the offenders, don't just leave them out of the listings. There is no room in contesting for that sort of garbage.
WZ0L on 2002-02-10
Proven cheating DQ!! "Suspected of
cheating" CQWW's option is fine with me
Enter your opinion about DQ for cheating?:
The opinions expressed within Contesting Online Speak Out are those of the
contributor, and not necessarily that of Contesting Online. Contesting Online
simply provides a forum for people to express their opinions on
various amateur radio contesting subjects of interest.
Do you have an idea for a Speak Out topic?
Email our Speak Out Manager
with your ideas.