You know, I think the person who chastised the "get a life" comment may have been acting in kindness to a gentleman that has earned our respect, but... Even at 85, there is such a thing as being over
I have to admit I'm on the fence on this one. If it was a pre-arranged attempt to monopolize frequencies, then it raises an eyebrow. If, as it seems from the description, two guys who just happened t
Hi Scott, Contest Period: 0000 UTC to 2359 UTC December 19, 2009. By my calculation, that's a Saturday (UTC), or 6 p.m. Friday to 5:59 p.m. Saturday (CST). 73, kelly ve4xt ___________________________
Marty, I think you may be getting a little overly ad hominem in your debating style here. Dave has never said his concerns are about guaranteeing a win. He has never said his concerns are ONLY about
I'm with Lindquist on this one: ham radio contests aren't typing class. Never were, never should be. As long as it's an honest typo, where it's clear that the operator did indeed copy correctly but m
And of course, that raises another question: If writing the rules will take a team of lawyers, then each of us will have to consult with our $300-per-hour legal beagles to understand them. Is that th
Are we really going to the place where asking for clarification on generic operating issues counts as assistance? I am sure the station that sent JTT for 100 isn't unique, so asking "what does J mean
It seems as though this conversation centres a lot around the question of progress. Is it the role of amateur radio to stand by and let the world advance around it? I would say no, and I'm sure that
W9SZ opined: Fun should be the ONLY reason for contesting. 73, kelly ve4xt _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.co
K3TUP's project is now ranked No.1! _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
There was a contest just like this. Might still be there, too: the Classic Radio Exchange. I know you got significant bonus points for using a classic (>25 years) radio, and there might have been bon
Hi Brett, I'd like to see an example of where or how one of us will be harmed by a QSO with an operator using a decoder. Is it "I had to learn the code, dammit, so everybody else must too"? I can't i
While the advice from John is good, I think it's also reasonable to think that Joe knew what he was asking about. That said, I do remember the last FD operation I was at (other than my own solo 1D ef
Paul's right: giving everybody fair playing conditions isn't the same as rendering everyone equal. Is it not possible, just thinking out loud here, to request the DX Cluster operators to kindly emplo
I just find it really interesting, in the face of the relentless march of technology, that the station with the MOST spots did not win and that the station with no spots at all placed sixth. Be inter
This isn't directed at any one individual, irrespective of my choosing one peron's post to do "reply all" to, so Joe, this isn't directed AT you personally, 'kay? Whatever happened to the idea of eng
Hi all, May I respectfully suggest checking the archives on this one? Zack is right: even as quoted by Nate, the rule doesn't even specify amateur licence. However, if you check the archives, the rul
Hi all, The ARRL has weighed in previously on this debate as well. According to the rules, the exchange consists of five parts: 1. Serial no. 2. Precedence 3. Sending station's callsign 4. Check 5. A
The ARRL recognizes its rule is ambiguous but also recognizes that it simply doesn't matter. It matters not one whit if the check is legitimate or made up: unlike a radiogram, an exchange is not abou
I like the intention, but I think we all know there are enough people out there who don't exactly engage brain when shifting into grab-a-spot mode that you'd end up with a bunch of people calling on