It just becomes another tool for cheaters to exploit. The 'slippery slope'
argument states that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of
related events culminating in some significant effect.
For example, set up a remote station in Eu and work everything remotely
(transmit and receive) from say both Eu and NA while claiming one is in NA
during or outside a contest. Lots of possible scenarios. I would guess
that it is probably happening already in one way or another.
While you claim that nobody supports the operation described below, without
realizing it, you are only encouraging it. Slippery slope.
Come-on, nobody cheats do they.
In the year 2525 ...
>I am NOT in support of using remote receiving sites while claiming to be
>operating from elsewhere.
>I don't know anyone that supports being able to use receivers located
>across the globe while sitting in their shack. We already had this
>discussion and I think we all understand that it is probably happening
>and very difficult to detect.
>I fully support remote stations where the receiving and transmitting
>portions of the station have to remain in the area defined by the rules
>but where the operator is controlling the station from outside this area.
CQ-Contest mailing list