My understanding is that rf monitoring IS being done and penalties are in
place.

On Mon, Oct 27, 2025, 4:50 PM Geert Jan de Groot via Elecraft <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> "Is there no responsibility for the organization of the CQ WW contest
> here"?
>
> Let me show how a different contest organization deals with a similar
> problem of contest stations cheating.
>
> A little background. Weekend before last was the annual
> Jamboree-On-The-Air. An event where Scouts, using hamradio equipment,
> make radio contact with Scouts at other groups. I'm not sure this is a
> big thing in the US of A given reports of "several hundred" JOTA
> stations active; in the Netherlands (we're a much smaller country!) ,
> there were over 170 radio stations active. Experience has learned this
> is also a huge introduction in the hamradio hobby; in the group I am
> supporting there are half a dozen Scouts with licenses; another half
> dozen Scouts are in the process of getting theirs (up to "they only need
> to do an exam which is already scheduled in weeks ahead"). As said, it
> is a great way to introduce young people into our hobby (see the
> discussion about introducing young people into our hobby on this list
> just a few weeks ago).
>
> However, there are challenges. Many years ago, when our neighbor country
> Germany was still split up between West and East and the iron curtain
> still existed, the East German radio club organized a contest in the
> same weekend. When the iron curtain fell and East and West became one
> Germany, the contest became "Worked All Germany" and suddenly our Scouts
> doing their first hamradio experiences had to compete the band with
> contest stations next door giving their best.
>
> The bands now have "contest-free segments" and us JOTA stations operate
> there, while outside these contest-free segments the contest runs in
> full force. This allows co-existence and I am very happy for the WAG
> contest organization to support us.
>
> That leaves the issues of contest stations cheating, and this is where
> responsibility of the contest organization kicks in. The WAG contest
> organization, for some years now, makes SDR-recordings of the amateur
> bands during the run of the contest. All the contest bands, for the full
> run of the contest. In case of questions on claims of contest stations,
> all it takes is to "rewind the recordings" to time and frequency to hear
> what has happened.
> And for us JOTA-stations, all it takes is for us to contact an
> interfering contest station, gently remind them of the rules (I have
> found that in the majority of cases this is sufficient), but for
> persistent cases, send a report "station XXX was operating on frequency
> YYY at time ZZZ" to the WAG contest organizer and I know that the
> contest organizer has acted on these reports.
>
> No need to get the equivalent of the FCC involved, no discussion if the
> FCC should or should not, ARRL should or should not, and the process
> works very well.
>
> In this regard, I wonder if the organizer of the CQ WW contest is taking
> their responsibility?
> Keep in mind that "fair play" is part of the amateur radio values and
> frankly it is a pity we need to have this discussion to begin with.
>
> I do wonder why the CQ WW organizers are not taking their responsibility.
>
> 73,
>
> Geert Jan PE1HZG
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[email protected]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [email protected]
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[email protected]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [email protected] 

Reply via email to