I'm pretty sure any realistic interpretation of the term "CQ" would include
any solicitation of contact with another station, regardless of the exact
language, characters, or symbols used.
73,
Greg NA2N
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Trent Sampson <vk4ts@outlook.com> wrote:
> Do we as contesters need to promote a set of rules for all HF Contests ?
>
> Definitions of what we expect for a Single OP a multi Op and ask that of
> all contest managers ?
>
> The problem with that is the old "variety is the spice of life" what makes
> different contests interesting is the quirks of the rules.
>
> Interleaved QSOs I have no problem with on two bands - but I do have
> problems on the same band - this has the potential to create a real mess -
> why stop at two transmitted signals?
>
> CQ has treated the issue with the following rule
>
>
> 1. Only one signal on a band is allowed at any time. When two or more
> transmitters are present on the same band, a hardware device MUST be used
> to prevent more than one signal at any one time. Alternating CQs on two or
> more frequencies on a band is not permitted.
> While this is admirable it does not prohibit two run frequencies if a
> station wants to argue they did not call CQ on the second TX eg CALLSIGN
> CALLSIGN QRZ
>
> There are lots of anomalies that this group has problems with - remember
> that for every rule change there is a cause and effect - Sometimes rule
> changes are not for the better.
>
> Lots to ponder
>
> hope to hear as many as possible on for the CQWPX from VK4KW
>
> 73
>
>
> Trent
> VK4TS
> Po Box 275 Mooloolaba QLD 4557
> Mobile 0408497550
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|