<< >Hi Jon, So, I guess Bos represents "the law" here... hi 73 to y'all, and CU from SL3ZV on 20, 40, 80 and 160 !! Jon, sm3ojr Hmmmm... CQ WPX rules specifically say NO. Inconsistency between CQ WW
Yep! Blow-by. For some reason, when using CW filters in 706, there is a blow-by of 3-5 kHz off the center frequency, annoying high pitched "picture" of the signal. I have not taken magnifying glass t
(About W6RJ:) That gives him an unfair, very unfair, advantage over everyone else.<< Yep! Just like those with electronic keyers, computers, two radios, amplifiers, big antennas, faster operators, sm
There is a question regarding awards, and an area to add comments at the bottom of the page. This is a great opportunity to voice your concerns directly to CQ.<< And ask for removing 3 QSO "penalty",
period if-and only if-the station worked is a new multiplier. Logs found in violation of the 10-minute rule will automatically be reclassified as multi-multi."<< Which means that if M/S station happe
are different (perhaps even the same make and model), but the location, amplifier and antenna system are the same, the "station" is the same, regardless of the callsign. << Back in old country and ol
If there are people out there who are breaking these rules, let's simply agree not to work them in any contests until they learn the lesson. The best policing of our contesting community is what we d
Thanks Jim for shedding some light at the D4B situation. We hope to hear some more from the "horses" mouth. Some of the points you mentioned are very valid and some of us kept wondering "wasaaap"? So
with the CW PTT?<< 1. Precise timing and fine tuning the switching between rig - amp - antenna controls. 2. Elimination of the last (word) pause when finishing transmission, avoiding blackout of few
by introducing a new level of transparency to contest adjudication. Perhaps a real-time logging/scoreboard infrastructure? This is asolvable problem given Internet technology available today. << I do
Honest contesters have nothing to hide in their UBNs! << Looks like problem is with some top scorers who are also members of the Contest Committee, they like to keep their "tactics" secret. I had a c
after the event, for later scrutiny. Why stop there? Why not "compete in the daylight" in the first place? Why not know your position against other competitors while the contest is still going on?<<
Concerning making logs available for public review, is there a person, or site, to which one can send a log to be posted for public consumption after the log submission deadline?<< I think the best w
Just wondering. I notice that my email brings batches of messages from the Contesting reflector. Not individual postings as they come. Are we subject to Homeland Security screening, delay and posting
connection to the Internet backbone. I would need about 3-4 Intel servers running the Linux O/S. I would also need a load balancer (F5, local director) or another server that can function as a load b
Grids, they would need to either sponsor a new contest _or_ modify the exchange in an existing contest to support that award. For example, you could replace the universal 59(9) signal report with the
are willing to support with magazine space. The Tesla Cup would be just another HF DX contest, and one that wouldn't necessarily align with either organization's award programs. It doesn't surprise m
Good progress! I wonder if the calls once assigned will be reserved for the same station, or reissued as paid for? The big problem with single letter suffix calls is that it messes up the QSLing and
Oooops, for some reason this was chopped off from the posting: (especially in the exchange and multipliers definitions) to be potentially interesting. I wouldn't be making the claim that it "fixes" p
Still waiting for logs, QST/ARRL included TC mention in their calendar for the first time this year. It is a good start. We will start heavy promotion with 2006 running. Tesla RC is getting new home