You have to look slightly further. The official Cabrillo specifications for SS logs do not reflect the ARRL's rules - callsigns appear once only in Cabrillo QSO records. http://www.kkn.net/~trey/cabr
Why no penalty this year? This is not something new. Mike W0MU J6M CQ WW DX CW Contest 2011 J6/W0MU November 21 - December 1 2011 W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net __________________________________________
Dear Paul (SS-Non-participant), The Cabrillo specification is not part of the rules for this contest, and thus carries no weight in this argument. Submitting a Cabrillo log is not a requirement for p
Paul, I'm afraid you've really lost me with this one. What does the content of the Cabrillo reporting format have to do with what is the required information to be sent in the exchange? All of the in
Paul, Being correct is not necessarily pedantic. The rule requires that the callsign be sent as part of the exchange. The fact that one may already have knowledge of the callsign in advance of sendin
I like the having the call in the exchange. Here's why.... I used spots for the first time and I did all S&P. Watched the spots for new sections while tuning the radio by hand. When you hear someone
Well said, Hans. I agree fully. 73, Geo... George Wagner, K5KG Sarasota, FL 941-400-1960 cell Dear Paul (SS-Non-participant), The Cabrillo specification is not part of the rules for this contest, and
I suspect it never happened in the days of radiograms that a station receiving a radiogram discounted the entire message because the elements of the preamble were not sent in the correct order. My gu
It seems that Hans cannot accept that anyone outside the USA might be qualified to comment on SS. Wrong - electronic logs submitted in any format other than the specified Cabrillo format are rejected
EI5DI said:To which, the only sensible response is "Why?". The sensible answer is: because it is required! I know that the ARRL will not change the SS exchange simply because you feel it's redundant
Not true at all, Paul. Canadians also have skin in the game. Your suggestion is duly noted. Nunc et semper. 73, de Hans, K0HB _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list C
And as usual That rule is broken just like the CK is constantly being broken. It is a NUMBER that is one of two possible numbers. NOT any number you choose to use. Joe WB9SBD ________________________
No, the sensible response is, "OK" and then do it. That's what the contest rules require and have required for nearly 80 years. I am also forbidden to touch my golf club to the sand whilst getting o
There is nothing in a radio contest exchange that is really important. SS has a long history and it is great that it continues. Some people like to run at 300 an hour and SS is one of those contest w
Joe, The ARRL and the Contest Manager in WRITING has declared that they do not care what two numbers you use as long as you use that the entire contest. Sorry if this defeats someones database so the
Really? So, Sweepstakes rule 8.6, written by the contest sponsor, which says "Hand-written paper logs are acceptable entries" is not correct? I don't see anything in the rules that says paper logs ar
Right, I know that can not be easily verified. But it is the "Spirit" of the rules. If the rules say it is to be one thing or another and not just a random number, then it should be one of those two
Well then should they not change the wording of the rules? Or why bother having the rule at all? Joe WB9SBD The Original Rolling Ball Clock Idle Tyme Idle-Tyme.com http://www.idle-tyme.com __________
However... as a practical matter, there's no real hard and fast way to verify that the check you use actually is the aforementioned year. Yes, today there are plenty of databases around, but until th
I'm standing right with W5OV on this. Why change or not follow the rules because a minority feels it might be outdated or archaic? The rules are the rules.. If they affect your rate, they affect ever