CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CX2DK CQWW checklog

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CX2DK CQWW checklog
From: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 21:05:20 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Rudy and group,

Serious question...it has to do with terminolgy. Is this really a DQ? W4PA's message to CX2DK does not use the term DQ, but reclassification.

As you wrote below, there was no violation, but a non-compliance situation.

Not taking sides, but DQ seems to strong for what happened.

73 de Vince, VA3VF



On 2017-03-03 7:17 PM, Rudy Bakalov via CQ-Contest wrote:
Not knowing the full details, however, it seems that the station has been DQ'd 
solely due to the lack of audio recording. That is, no other rule violation or 
suspected violation was mentioned. So if indeed the log checker did not have 
any other concerns and the lack of recording was the only reason, the DQ seems 
a bit excessive.

Rudy N2WQ
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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