[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Internet Radio Abusers

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Internet Radio Abusers
From: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 23:06:45 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

As if anyone cares, Doug.

Besides, how do you plan to police this sort of thing? Since the rules allow such operations, nobody really needs to declare anything other than where their transmitter/receiver was located ... they don't have to declare where they were located.

And actually ... the rules do make it right. The rules (governing body and contest sponsor) are all that count, period. Don't participate if you don't like the rules.

That being said, you always have the right to refuse a QSL for whatever reason you like, silly or otherwise. Just don't try to pretend your reasons have anything to do with the rules. The contact was legitimate according to the contest rules you agreed to adhere to ... assuming you enter a log. If you carried that a bit further and deleted the "offending" QSO from your log before you submitted it, I'd disqualify your log if I was the contest sponsor.

Dave   AB7E

On 11/5/2015 5:34 PM, Doug Renwick wrote:
This is how I plan to handle internet radio abusers.  First I should define
an internet radio abuser.  An operator who uses a remote station beyond say
a distance of 20 miles from their operating location.  Any station that is
an internet radio abuser who wishes to receive a QSL card for a contact with
my station, will be told that they are a NIL.  Why?  I do not consider the
contact to be legitimate.  And for those who blather on about the rules
allowing larger distances; the rules do not make it right.

Climate change is natural.  I want climate change.  I want it to be warmer
where I live.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

CQ-Contest mailing list

CQ-Contest mailing list

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