ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- In a sense, both are the same thing with different names. One has the other ops in your shack, the other has them in other shacks, but the point is you are being
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- What's wrong with the DOS that already comes with WinXP? In fact there are two versions: The original DOS and a version which handles long file names. Do they no
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- Ok, if you say so. I run a number of DOS programs such as G4FGQ's suite of calculator programs and K6STI's coil.exe and maybe a few others. None of them require
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- It's really simple, really. The other station has assisted you by giving you information about where to find the VO1. He fed the information directly to you, nob
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- I think it's a bit risky to send the exchange before you know the other guy's call sign. Too often the other guy will miss the ?, think the QSO is completed and
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- In the ARRL contests, it does not matter if the info was solicited or not. Quoting from the ARRL White Paper on contest practices: "The only time there's a probl
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- I would. I had a string of six sweeps in a row and the next year I missed NNY section. There is now a huge gap in my lineup of mugs. Ruined my life. :-) Bill, W6
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- You found him without assistance, so work him. You're in the clear. Incidentally, the ARRL White Paper covers this very circumstance. It says anything you causal
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- One spot from one station given only one time can indeed influence the outcome of a contest. In the first RTTY contest I ever entered, I won the 7th district cer
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- Not so, at least in ARRL contests. The ARRL White Paper on contest practices states that information casually overheard is fair game for unassisted operators. It
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- It will have no effect. To be "assisted" you have spot information sent to you by a person, either directly over the air, over the phone or by packet. A bandscop
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: In another thread, -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- Tree is way ahead of most of us on this. I would suggest there should be only two basic classes of operating: Traditional and Unlimited. A Tra
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- If you call "CQ VY1" and a VY1 answers, you are still unassisted. But if someone else replies and tells you where to find the VY1, you are assisted - if and only
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- No, if you act on the information you are now assisted. The crucial item is whether a third party helped you find the needed station, and in your example, he did
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- According to the ARRL White Paper on contest practices, anything overheard on the air and not directed to you personally does not change your unassisted status.
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- In the context of contesting, "assistance" means the help of a third person in finding and/or working other stations, or in operating the equipment at your stati
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- Those are very interesting scenarios. In the case of 1 and 2, you are providing "assistance" in helping him operate his equipment, so a very strict interpretatio
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- I don't think you would have to be the only one. I can visualize a situation where somebody decides to help only members of his club. He finds their operating fr
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- You are right. I was looking at "assistance" as anything which is not single-operator unassisted and that does indeed include multi-op. I stand corrected. Thanks
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- I agree, that is a ridiculous assertion. Making a directional CQ or CQ (specific area) does not involve assistance from a third party at all and as far as I know