[Cwo] a couple more

[Alan Maenchen]

OK,  I'm finally back again from CQP.  That was fun.
Photos here:
https://picasaweb.google.com/117668077218135394042/CQP2011AD6ETulare

I was sponsored by US Tower corp.  They gave me a 56ft crankup trailer, a
military communications shelter, and people to help me set up and tear down.
They even allowed me to stay in their VIP guest house. Really nice people.

Odd that a state QSO party like CQP actually has stricter log checking than
CWO which is billed as a "serious" contest takeoff from CWT.  That is: CWT
is fun practice but CWO is for trophies.

If you think I was harsh on you guys, you should see my log report
(attached).  :-)
I've been doing this kind of log checking for some 15 years and I've learned
a lot .. but I still make too many mistakes. Mostly it's marginal copy where
I wind up guessing.  In situations like this, a wrong guess only means not
getting credit for the QSO so might as well guess. Some contests like SS
actually attach a 2 QSO penalty for a wrong guess. That makes you wake up
and take notice!

73, Alan  AD6E






On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Don Greenbaum <don at aurumtel.com> wrote:

> My point was, ding me.  I don't care and for those in it to win it,
> adjucate away.  In fact, lots of state contests, like the NE QSO party only
> checks scores who might win something.  That's what all the "check" logs
> like mine are used for ....
>
> Don
> N1DG  dinged........
>
> At 10:46 AM 10/1/2011, k6rb at baymoon.com wrote:
> >Wrong! CWO is a CONTEST! CWT is the non-contest. CWO is adjudicated and
> >logs are checked. So, if you want to play fast and loose, that's okay, but
> >you'll get dinged for it in score. The people who chose to play in CWO,
> >for the most part, are serious about it.
> >
> >Rob K6RB
> >
> >
> >> Definitely I agree with Don. I wasn't careful at all.  It didn't matter.
> >> It wasn't a contest.  It was an activity.  So what if I called Pete
> >> "Pedro"
> >> and recorded it that way?  Or I got the wrong number and didn't bother
> >> correcting when I then heard it again?  In fact, I am not sure all this
> >> log
> >> evaluation is consistent with our "non-contest" theology for CWO.
> >>
> >> jt
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: cwo-bounces at kkn.net [mailto:cwo-bounces at kkn.net] On Behalf Of Don
> >> Greenbaum
> >> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2011 8:41 AM
> >> To: Alan Maenchen; cwo at kkn.net
> >> Subject: Re: [Cwo] a couple more
> >>
> >> I can see how I got 124 vs 134 for W1RM...Pete was esp copy.
> >>
> >> The other busted number?????   I give up.
> >>
> >> I was just in it to give points, so I was very lazy on correcting the
> name
> >> filled in by writelog.  I suspect a lot of others felt the same way.
> >> makes
> >> it harder on you though so I'll be more careful next year.  Sloppy habit
> >> holdover from CWT where no one sees the log.
> >>
> >> Don
> >>
> >> At 06:14 PM 9/29/2011, Alan Maenchen wrote:
> >>>Attached are N1DG and NO5W reports.;
> >>>
> >>>Here's where being "hard-ass" hits the road.
> >>>
> >>>SCOT (sent) vs SCOTT (received)
> >>>SERGE (sent) vs SERGEI (received)
> >>>JULES (sent) vs JULIUS (received)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>However, I'm accepting ROCK (received) vs ROQ (sent) since the vast
> >> majority (149 of 256) copied ROCK from NE7D.
> >>>I'm not sure about this one, but I suspect NE7D did indeed send ROCK
> some
> >> times even though ROQ is what's in his Session 1 log as 'sent'. In his
> >> Session 2 log, NE7D lists 'ROCK' as his name.  Presumably  >100 people
> >> copied "ROQ" scattered over different sessions. I don't have the
> software
> >> to
> >> tackle this one, so I'm just going to accept both names.
> >>>
> >>>Alan
> >>>
> >>>PS .. I'll be QRT on the internet in another couple of hours.  Back on
> >> Monday after CQP
> >>>
> >>>Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="NO5W.RPT"
> >>>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="NO5W.RPT"
> >>>X-Attachment-Id: f_gt6atfdt0
> >>>
> >>>Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="N1DG.RPT"
> >>>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="N1DG.RPT"
> >>>X-Attachment-Id: f_gt6atm9h1
> >>>
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>Cwo mailing list
> >>>Cwo at kkn.net
> >>>http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Please consider the environment before printing this email
> >>
> >> www.gulftrackservices.com
> >> Don Greenbaum
> >> 27 Pill Hill Lane, Duxbury, MA 02332
> >> phone: 781 934 5534
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Cwo mailing list
> >> Cwo at kkn.net
> >> http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Cwo mailing list
> >> Cwo at kkn.net
> >> http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email
>
> www.gulftrackservices.com
> Don Greenbaum
> 27 Pill Hill Lane, Duxbury, MA 02332
> phone: 781 934 5534
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.kkn.net/pipermail/cwo/attachments/20111004/e7d760b1/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: AD6E.RPT
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 2712 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.kkn.net/pipermail/cwo/attachments/20111004/e7d760b1/attachment.obj