Any rule or law that is not enforced is efectively reduced to the status of a recommendation or a plea - as in "you really should pay your taxes" or "please don't drive over 60 mph". When contest spo
It can, and does, take the mult away! Here's how it works, according to K1TTT on 23 October 2005 - with regard to stations in Zone 16 sending 17 in their exchange. It's clear, therefore, that it does
Wrong - you log the zone that should have been sent. Otherwise, you may not realise you still need the "wrong" zone - the one that was actually sent. The fact that the wrong zone, not the one copied,
It's not so difficult - when all logs are published. Cheaters tend to have a shorter average time between spot and QSO than those who are not cheating. Cheaters, by nature, are greedy and won't wait
SO2R is one operator using two radios, listening on one while transmitting on the other, or listening on both at the same time. Who knows, the operator might even use two or more antennas at the same
Snip .. We have a two-tier system already. If you're serious, you send in a Cabrillo log - an electronic text record of your QSOs. If you're not serious, you send in something else or perhaps don't s
Let's try a reality check here. In-shack spotting consists of real-time acceptance of spotting assistance from one or more other operators. It is indeed multi-op or, more accurately, multi-single. Th
My thanks to Doug for the background to Single Op Assisted. It was very helpful, and I think the description was a good choice at the time. What seems to have happened in recent years is that increas
Self-spotting is considered to be "un-sportsmanlike conduct". As such, it is specifically prohibited under the "Disqualification" paragraph. 73, Paul EI5DI ___________________________________________
"Self-spotting, etc" are considered to be un-sportsmanlike conduct. As such, they are prohibited under the "Disqualification" paragraph in the rules for CQWW 160M. 73, Paul EI5DI ____________________
-- Original Message -- To make it a winner, let's leave out 5NN (or whatever you use yourself). K6VVA: TEST G1XYZ: G1XYZ K6VVA: G1XYZ CA G1XYZ: L K6VVA: TU K6VVA Any good reason why not - other than
Snip Snip It is broke! It has been broken for over 20 years - since computer logging became the norm. CT, the first major contest logger, had no provision for logging RST Sent as anything other than
The difference is that users were locked in to sending 599 in every QSO. Even if they wanted to send something else, it wouldn't let them. What's not clear is whether you are defending the exchange o
Sure - but have you checked what is logged, rather than what is sent? I made a mistake in mentioning CT because people have latched on to that, and ignored the issue of meaningless exchanges. More sp
Snip. Could it be that the security and sanctity, not to mention the integrity, of DXCC is a little over-rated? Where is the integrity in working the DX from any station you choose (in your own count
Hal Offutt asked Joe Subich, W4TV answered I'm with Joe on this one. Why not compare a telephone call to a QSO. Everyone accepts that a telephone call is a person-to-person event. In the same way, a
Snip. Yes, and sails have been replaced by engines, so all sailing boats are obsolete? And walking has been replaced by cars, so walking is obsolete? I don't think so. In any given activity, particip
That's good to know, but it might help if you gave us a reason :-) Let's say I use a remote-controlled camera to take a photo of the Grand Canyon. Can I announce that I've photographed the Grand Cany
Yes, and even more points when they work one another, and double mults when all RF is eliminated - it only pollutes the ionosphere. I'd recommend Skype - it's a great mode, with highly advanced techn
You're ready - sitting quietly, not making a sound. You've been waiting for hours and your eyes are beginning to feel the strain. Just then, a lion slowly ambles into your sights - it has no idea you