Ria: Glad you mentioned the "On their toes" comment was a joke -- its
hard to tell sometimes in text only e-mail. Following the thread,
there are those with that sentiment that are not joking. As you say,
let common sense prevail. Copy what is sent, correct and verify any
prefill if you are using them.
To others following the thread: Perhaps someone can clarify: I fail
to understand why one would want to confuse those using prefills by
purposely changing information that is supposed to be an unchanging
fact -- year first licensed. Requests for repeats slow both stations
down. I guess we all contest for different reasons. --Mike, WV2ZOW
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
> The rules are always ambiguous.
>
> We've been through this with things like in-band CQing. It wasn't in
> the rules - so it was "allowed" until it wasn't, because ARRL said
> that it was never their intent to permit that practice.
>
> Some things go beyond the rules. Some are common sense. Not using
> external sources for the data you're supposed to be copying on-air
> seems like common sense. This is like running a race but using a
> segway and thinking it's OK because that specific device is not
> specifically prohibited.
>
>
>
> 73
> Ria, N2RJ
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>> The rules are vague on the SS check? Really?
>>
>>
>> When operating as an individual, it should be the year YOU were first
>> licensed. Even if you are "borrowing" someone's shack.
>>
>>
>> If it is a multi-single effort, it should be the year that the HOST was
>> first licensed. In the case of a club station, that would be the year that
>> the CLUB was first licensed.
>>
>>
>> Nothing vague about that.
>>
>>
>> OK, so the rules may not have been written with iron-clad legal-type
>> precision years ago. We could always hire attorneys to scrutinize the rules
>> to make them so precise that their ought to be no ambiguity... of course
>> there always will be, in the minds of some, but that's beside the point...
>> but then, who would read 150 pages of rules in legalese? Plain English
>> ought to be more than adequate.
>>
>>
>> IMHO there is no ambiguity. The intent of the rules is clear.
>>
>>
>> 73, ron W3WN
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
>> To: Michael Clarson <wv2zow@gmail.com>
>> Cc: James Cain <jamesdavidcain@gmail.com>; CQ contest reflector
>> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
>> Sent: Fri, Oct 20, 2017 11:58 am
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] "It's just to save on typing"
>>
>> The difficulty with being obstinate about following rules to the letter is
>> situations vary and rules are often vague. The check is certainly in that
>> category.If you are a guest op, is it YOUR year of first licence or your
>> host’s? If you’re using his callsign, using your check muddles matters. If
>> it’s a multiop, whose check? If you were to follow the rules to the letter,
>> you might have each op giving out his own check (it’s not exactly clear when
>> all it says is “the year you were first licensed.”)Further: the rules also
>> state quite clearly “the decisions of the ARRL are final.” The ARRL has
>> decided it will not enforce checks (pretty hard to do, anyway). (Which is
>> not the same as saying you get away with miscopying a check, merely the
>> League will take no steps to determine if VE4XT really was first licensed in
>> 1982. (I was.))So, if you’re obstinate about following rules and the rules
>> say the ARRL decisions are final, then you must accept there is some
>> deliberate vagueness to the rule and stop worrying about it.73, kelly, ve4xt
>> > On Oct 20, 2017, at 9:05 AM, Michael Clarson <wv2zow@gmail.com> wrote:> >
>> Have to agree with James. Rules pretty clear on what the exchange is.> Check
>> is"year first licensed", not some two digit number I made up to> change
>> things up. --Mike, WV2ZOW> > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:23 AM,
>> <jamesdavidcain@gmail.com> wrote:>> Lessee, now. This discussion began
>> concerning the ARRL Sweepstakes>> contest(s).>> >> Seems to me that a
>> legitimate entry must follow the rules for the exchange,>> and those rules
>> are specific. I don't see where any of the exchange elements>> can be
>> fudged, or "negotiated.">> >> If you don't plan to submit your SS log you
>> can fudge anything you want -->> except your call sign. But that's not
>> playing fair.>> >> K1TN>> >> >> 4.1. A consecutive serial number;>> >> 4.2.
>> Precedence;>> >> 4.2.1. "Q" for Single Op QRP (5 Watts output or less);>> >>
>> 4.2.2. "A" for Single Op Low Power (up to 150 W output);>> >> 4.2.3. "B" for
>> Single Op High Power (greater than 150 W output);>> >> 4.2.4. "U" for Single
>> Op Unlimited Single-Op Unlimited High Power and>> Single-Op Unlimited Low
>> Power both send "U")>> >> 4.2.5. "M" for Multi-Op (Multiop High Power and
>> Multiop Low Power both send>> "M")>> >> 4.2.6. "S" for School Club;>> >>
>> 4.3. Your Callsign (remember that you must include your call sign during
>> the>> exchange)>> >> 4.4. Check>> >> 4.4.1. The last 2 digits of the year of
>> first license for either the>> operator or the station.>> >> 4.4.2. An entry
>> must send the same Check throughout the entire contest.>> >> 4.5. ARRL/RAC
>> Section (click here for the official list>>
>> <http://www.arrl.org/contest-sections-list> )>> >> >> >> ----------->> >>
>> I've been meaning to change things up anyway, just to keep them on their>>
>> toes.>> >> 73>> Ria, N2RJ>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:31 PM Art Boyars
>> <artboyars@gmail.com> wrote:>> >>> When I saw the post about Call History
>> Files for SS, and then saw the post>>> for the site where you can get them,
>> I was tempted to put in some bogus>>> data -- change CK 60 to CK 69; change
>> name Art to name Ari. But I'm not>>> quite that cranky. Yet.>>> >>> 73,
>> Art K3KU>>> >>> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 12:48 AM, Radio K0HB
>> <kzerohb@gmail.com> wrote:>>> >>>> Where possible, I routinely "update" my
>> exchange from the last contest,>>>> just to confound those who use
>> "pre-loaded" data file crutches.>>>> >>>> 73, de Hans, K0HB>>>> >>>> >>>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Art Boyars>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 31,
>> 2017 9:01 PM>>>> To: CQ-Contest Reflector>>>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] "It's
>> just to save on typing">>>> >>>> E-mail chatting with N4ZR, who has
>> relocated from WV to MD. Pete muses>>>> that a lot of people who rely on
>> SCP or Call History (or whatever it is)>>>> "to save on typing" will bust
>> the QSO by logging him as WV.>>>> >>>> I can see it now -- a cry for making
>> the data files official; perhaps>>>> prohibiting people from relocating or
>> using a different name.>>>> >>>> "All participants must register in the
>> official Call History File. Your>>>> log must contain the data as reported
>> in that File. Scoring will be in>>>> accordance with that File.">>>> >>>>
>> Just think of all the typing we'll save!>>>> >>>> 73, Art K3KU>>>> who hopes
>> you took this in fun (sort of)>>>>
>> _______________________________________________>>>> 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>>> >>
>> _______________________________________________>> 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>
>> _______________________________________________> CQ-Contest mailing list>
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest_______________________________________________CQ-Contest
>> mailing
>> listCQ-Contest@contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|