> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Joe
> Subich, W4TV
> Sent: March 27, 2007 03:07
> To: 'Eric Hilding'; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Cc: nccc@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R REMOTE CONTESTING
>
>
> Rick,
>
> > However, "in an abundance of caution" I personally want to
> get a firm,
> > iron-clad answer to this from the Contest Sponsors.
>
> Like you, I would want a firm ruling from the contest
> sponsors and a decision on what constitutes "all equipment"
> particularly as technology has the potential to change the
> nature of the transceiver as we currently know it.
>
> My personal prejudices are that the operator should also be
> within the "circle" but that may not be practical for some
> people. However, in any case, the operator should be within
> the same entity (or contest multiplier). Thus an operator in
> the US should not be permitted to run a DX contest remotely
> from the Caribbean or other "DX" location ... an operator in
> Florida should not do Sweepstakes remotely from VY1 ... even
> an operator in Ohio should not contest remotely from WV.
>
> Still, those "political" issues are separate from the
> technology questions.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
Hallalujah... I thought I was the only one!
Thanks Joe. My thoughts exactly.
73 -- Paul VO1HE
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|