[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] your opinion pse

To: "'Phillip Conza'" <zl2tze@yahoo.com.au>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] your opinion pse
From: "Jorge Diez - CX6VM" <cx6vm.jorge@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:42:14 -0300
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Hi Phillip

Wich contest are you talking about?

I don´t agree with that. I don´t like to participate in contest with this
kind of rule. And if not specify in the rules is worst

This is why I don´t participate in contests that assume that you are lying
and adding QSO´s in the log


-----Mensaje original-----
De: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] En nombre de Phillip Conza
Enviado el: lunes, 25 de junio de 2012 01:48
Para: cq-contest@contesting.com
Asunto: [CQ-Contest] your opinion pse

                     Your opinions or ideas etc on this please.

A local contester had a contact removed because of :

.Last year an OP  worked a LU station but it was disallowed because he was
the only one who worked him, and 4 others had to work it before it was
allowed as a multiplier. Nothing in the rules about that - apparently it's
accepted international practice. 

I am not on a witch hunt I have read the rules covering this contest and I
have read the ARRL DX rules which I take qualify as a body who would use " 
accepted international practice " yet I can't find any reference to this
..Is there such or is this pie in the sky ?

Please gentleman your input.. or a pointer to this  " accepted international
practice "

Just don't want to see it happen again ..

73 Phillip
CQ-Contest mailing list

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>