George, The survey is OPEN to all. The link to it was posted right here on CQ-Contest. The CQ WW Contest Committee is conducting a survey to gather input from participants about various aspects of th
George, Everyone who submitted a CQWW (not WPX - this is a CQWW survey - not WPX) log with a valid email address this past year received a direct email invitation to the survey. In an attempt to spre
Charly, While I can understand your dismay over the way things have developed, not submitting a log serves no purpose. It becomes a non-event. If anything, submit your log as a CHECKLOG as a protest.
Scott, For any contest sponsor to reject a log, even one that is late is just as meaningless as not submitting a log. To properly cross-check logs, as many logs as can be collected are necessary. Wha
Dave, The reason CHECKLOGs should be accepted late is because the deadline is not only to "speed up the log checking process" - it's also and perhaps more importantly, to limit the amount of time for
Glenn, While some pine for the days of yore when there were no devices containing silicon involved in radio, the reality is that packet, spotting networks, et al are now fully part of amateur radio D
Paul, While I appreciate your tenacity with this, your analogy of assistance being "propulsion" is the one that is incorrect; Randy's analogy of using a GPS in sailing is indeed comparable to spottin
There is no way that this will save K1TN any time (sorry, old buddy). The number of repeat requests he will get by not following the established and REQUIRED exchange "pattern" will actually cost him
Wow. This is quite a treatise - is it not? It took me a while to read it; digest the whole thing; and to read some (most) of the other comments. Sadly, some of the story is historically incorrect. Jo
I am not speaking on behalf of the CQWW Committee here - and for further reference, unless it is specifically stated, no members of the CQWW Committee may speak *officially* for the Committee except
Paul, Your objection to any use of the Internet or commercial telecomm facilities in any ham radio activity is well known. You've been grinding the same flawed axe for years. I'm sure we would agree,
As much as it pains me, I'll bite. Let's focus on this error-filled comment: his arguments. In this context, the internet is an accessory - it is not a communications medium replacing or displacing a
EI5DI said: "W5OV will immediately say that there are no rules regulating remote control in contesting." Sorry - that accusation is also completely false: III. 7. An entrant's remote station is deter
Who enters a contest worrying about penalties? For the vast majority of entrants, it seems they don't care about penalties or what their final score is. It's all about playing with the radio : making
Hans, I'm sure this won't make you happy, but such an occurrence happened in this past year CQWW contests. Several good qsos began the log, but then it developed into total fantasy and every qso was
I have stayed at the Crowne Plaza for decades and I see it a bit differently. They have renovated (and improved) a large portion of the hotel and the work continues. More importantly, they have chang
The first step in all of this is to name names (callsigns). Saying that *someone* did this serves no purpose. You never know - the guy doing it may be clueless and not know that he's causing a proble
Tap the brakes, guys! There is nothing about signing up or registering before the contest in the rule! All commentary about this is complete conjecture!! The issue is being willing to allow inspectio
Marty, Bottom line, is that you and 99.99999% of all entrants have nothing to worry about. This rule was enacted several years ago to allow for the CQWW to conduct on-site inspections. Period. 73, Bo
All of these concerns are without any basis in fact. The rule does not stipulate anything regarding any of these "non-trivial" questions. There is no reason for anyone to presume that: 1) They will b