Seems to me that's right. Moreover, if you SET/NODX (or the equivalent)
on the Cluster node, there will be an independent record to prove that
while you were spotting, you were not *receiving* spots.
73, Pete N4ZR
The World Contest Station Database, updated daily at www.conteststations.com
The Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at
reversebeacon.blogspot.com,
spots at telnet.reversebeacon.net, port 7000
On 12/1/2010 10:09 PM, Barry wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's OK for a single-op
> (unassisted) to post spots, but not receive them. IIRC, CT has this
> functionality built in.
> Barry W2UP
>
> On 12/1/2010 7:30 AM, Jimk8mr@aol.com wrote:
>> If the unscrupulous person was a single op (not assisted) he would have to
>> be doubly unscrupulous to have an open packet/internet connection available
>> to spot the guy.
>>
>> If the person was assisted (single op or multi) it would be a sign of
>> scrupulousness that he wanted to verify the callsign from the sending
>> station,
>> not from third party spotting information.
>>
>> 73 - Jim K8MR
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|