[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] your opinion pse

To: zl2tze@yahoo.com.au, cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] your opinion pse
From: Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 07:43:59 -0500 (CDT)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Which contest did this happen with?
I've heard of a handful of contests that do this, and the usual reasoning boils 
down to whether or not a 'unique' call will be permitted. It could be a busted 
call, or a bootlegged or made-up call by someone having some twisted fun with 
the contest participants... or it could be a faked entry to give someone 
unethical a mult that no one else has. 
OTOH, I also know of many contests that will accept a 'unique' call, so long as 
it's determined that the call IS valid and isn't busted, etc.
But I wouldn't consider it 'accepted international practice.' 
73, ron w3wn

On 06/25/12, Phillip Conza wrote:

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>