When in doubt, check the rules. "In cases of portable operation, the portable designator will then become the prefix. <snip> You may not make up your own prefix". 73, Bob W5OV What is the reason for
Paul, Regardless of your opinion, or what might seem reasonable or logical, the FCC rules concerning "Reciprocal Operating Arrangements" state otherwise. From the FCC rules on the web: http://wireles
Paul, 599, or more accurately 5NN has been the default signal report for at least the 35 years that I have been contesting / DXing and probably goes back even longer than that. I think it might be mo
Paul, My point is that the default of sending 5NN had nothing to do with CT. And, CT did force mandate the sending of 5NN. You could program anything in that you wanted. You could hit Shift-F2 and ch
Critical word "not" was left out: And, CT did *NOT* force the sending of 5NN. Paul, My point is that the default of sending 5NN had nothing to do with CT. And, CT did force mandate the sending of 5NN
I had the same thought at first. However, I think that either Sean forgot what really happens, or an editor got to what he wrote and made it "nicer". Here it is: PJ2T: CQ Contest, CQ Contest, Papa Ja
Ward, Sure - but why not use the article to explain why being "abrupt" is correct instead of encouraging excessively wordy poor operating practice? I think if a newbie were to show up in his first co
What? What are you protesting against? Sign me puzzled, Bob W5OV I've recently learned that individual CQWW logs are available on the web for public access. Since I love a good contest weekend, I'll
Funny how Doug's guess at what Hans is upset about has spawned so much speculation and useless discussion. The ARRL has stated that the rule applies to the logs of DXpeditions only - it is not contes
Way back when this silly rule was added, I asked the then DXCC manager if this precluded contest logs being public. This is his reply: "Regarding contest logs, we really aren't terribly concerned abo
The rule we're discussing is under SECTION III. ACCREDITATION CRITERIA. A couple of quotes from this section make what Wayne said more clear: Under point 1: "It is the purpose of this section to esta
Joe, Accreditation only applies to certain DXpeditions. The contextual explanations in the Accreditation Section of the rules makes this very plain. There is no statement anywhere in that section tha
That Joe! What a card! It's April 22 - not April 1st! You said: "With Skimmer the operator must still tune the radio, listen/verify the call, send the exchange and log the QSO just as any other singl
Joe, Your assumption is wrong. Using Skimmer would not be cheating, but it clearly is assistance. The CQWW rules are quite clear when it says "The use of DX alerting assistance of any kind places the
Tor, What you describe is SO2R - not assistance. If you listen to 10 receivers yourself, you are doing it. 73, Bob W5OV _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Cont
(standard SO2R) that clearly gives me "DX alerting assistance" of another kind as well. Uh, no it does not. You have to copy the callsigns of the stations on the other band. 73, Bob W5OV ____________
I would say that none of the examples you give would be considered assisted. None of them copy the callsigns for the operator. They all require the operator to actively decode the callsign of the si
G3XTT's thoughtful analysis is quite good, but I do have one point I disagree on. First, what he is absolutely correct on: " Why hasthis suddenly come to a head when there have been technical Precise
I somewhat agree with EI5DI here which is a somewhat rare thing! I do think a different perspective is needed when one analyzes what types of technology should constitute assistance or not. The crite
Paul, As many have pointed out, we have had CW decoders for a long time. I have great respect for those who, for whatever reason, cannot operate CW themselves; but instead, they endure the slowness o