I would like to offer a differing opinion. Yesterday, I was operating briefly on 20m SSB. Many European stations were calling CQ in the 14.230 area. During their 100% legal operation, several SSTV st
I find this discussion maddening. Mal's analogy is totally without merit. No one owns any "property" along 40th ST. It's more like a freeway that anyone can use. Sometimes freeways are full of 18 whe
Interesting. Let's instead say that the bumper-to-bumper 18-wheelers are obeying the rules of the road. Why would you suggest that someone who wants to walk their dog should take precedence over the
Amen Jim! I agree that this type of selfish reasoning is making the world go downhill. The focus on self-esteem and one's own interests is a sad development in global society. Non-contesters thinking
Mal, The thing to do is keep sending the A precedence, and submit your log as a check log. 73, Bob W5OV How do you change categories during the middle of SS. I had some health issues which forced me
The problem with this discussion is that it is based on two fallacies: 1) The only person capable of understanding the rules in their entirety is the sponsor or the sponsor's appointed manager. 2) Th
Ev, In your buffer overrun example, you cite a sinister act. How is that in any way like using a convenient fictitious check in SS or using a fictitious name in a contest exchange that requires a nam
Rick, I don't think that changing to M is what you need to do. 3.14. In contests where spotting nets are permissible, spotting your own station or requesting another station to spot you is not permit
Bill, In this scenario, you would not have requested that the individual go and look for VE8 for you. If the guy was in your shack, you would have something to do with it. In this case, he did it of
Ev, Your conclusion: "It is the fact that you acted on that information that places you in a more appropriate category" is not correct. 2.1.1. Use of spotting assistance or nets (operating arrangemen
Rumors of rejections from CQWW due to version 3.0 are false. CQWW's robot accepts both formats. I recall hearing that the ARRL robot will begin accepting 3.0 with this year's ARRL 160m contest. 73, B
"Just as you CANNOT take unsolicited info, act upon it and be unassisted." I'm mystified by your conclusion. If you didn't arrange for it, and it is truly unsolicited, how can you be assisted? While
Ev, I didn't intend to suggest that there *should be* a time limit. Instead, my questions were meant to point out how unrealistic (maybe even absurd) such a definition of assisted would be. My summar
While I have a great desire to extinguish silly threads here on CQ-Contest, I must comment in dissention with this alleged "real world logic". The issue here is not receiving some information and doi
Ev, A couple of points. We're discussing what it means to be a Single Op Assisted or Unlimited entrant. The sponsors clearly define what it is. The questions about other things not included in the sp
Al, There are many of us who see this as you do. Doug and some others have a perspective that using information someone else gives you randomly is the same thing as "using spotting assistance". I dis
Geo, Given your explicit example, count my hand as saying that you would be assisted. 73, Bob W5OV (some comments ** below) Let me give a more explicit example. -- Consider this: I (K5TR) am in the S
Bill, "Also, in order to be "assisted", any spotting info must be either solicited by you or fed directly to you, so whatever you overhear on the air NOT DIRECTED TO YOU does not affect your unassist
Ev, While what Tom said is true, your interpretation of it seems to be that submitting a log is risky due to the slippery slope of adjudication variance. Since different people see things different w
Dave, Your comments are similar to some others we have heard here recently. The word "assistance" seems to be causing all sorts of confusion between multi-op and using remote spotting help from peopl