Of course you are always free to discuss the qualification rules and we are always open to any comment. But with the discussions we followed on different mailing lists and the feedback we got from se
I also thank Chris and the committee for reconsidering. 0.9 is better than nothing, though I would have wished for 0.8 with reference to the fact that WAE, RDXC and AA already have Assisted as the on
Martin, I would challenge you and claim that Brian is very correct on his statement about power cheating. You are correct about lack of solid statistics on cheating. The same applies to sports and do
Just wonder what next step in Hybrid Contesting and Hybrid DXing will be... Only your own imaginarion and capacity of your computer and internet connection will be the limit tomortow. Sad development
No matter how much I want Amateur Radio Contesting to survive and develop, there is no way on earth that I would believe money would solve that issue. If some inventive person want to create an Inter
Correction, Len SM5AOG, worked him on 15 meters the day before, but never on 20 meters as claimed. Sorry for typo 73 de RM2D Mats _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing li
The same story regarding SM5AOG in that fabricated 20 meter run. Len worked TO7A on 20 meter the day before. At the time of the claimed 20 meter contact, he worked ZW5B on 15 meter. Shortly before, h
Very well expressed Stan, Anyone that openly admits a mistake, apologizes for it, and expresses a sincere desire to improve, could ultimately be forgiven (by most people at least). However, and this
Brian, Have no doubts that I see this violation as very serious, and very intentional. I also agree that the possibility to "return to other CQ events" already in 2015 seems non logical. Atletes who
Interesting if true... This means in that case that organisers have given up even beforehand any ambitions to level playing field. They subsequently admit that some positions are better than others.
Mirko, So what rules do you violate to "make it fun"? 73 de RM2D _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/
Agree with Vasily. Done is done, and hard to make that better by throwing more darts... One is appointed "cheater of the year", but that does unfortunately not make contesting more clean. We can lear
Why not remove a useless ENN, 5NN or 599 at all? RAEM contest has already realized this, adding a relatively complicated long/lat message instead. I do not "buy" the argument that 5NN is a "get ready
Sam, You say: "No no no,I like it, we need this" (regarding ENN, SNN, 5NN or 599 A little bit further down, the same LY5W writes: "I hate (HATE) those callers who are using CQ TEST YA0YA YA0YA TEST"
Jukka, I think this happens to us all, both after contests and after normal contacts. I never heard any bad words about my principles of not changing any calls or times or frequencies in order to mak
QTC? without a call from us EU is nothing bad at all. We have full control of which stations that still have available QTC, so what's the point to bother him or her with my call? With RM2D, maybe not
I think such mistakes are more exclusions than a rule... I maintain my view that most serious EU participants have good control of from whom to receive QTC. Imagine if all started using this long mes
Tonno has some very valid points. Let us follow the rules and all will be fine. It is no worse to choose a category beforehand than to choose it when submitting a log. I was considering trying to att
(Sorry, sent away my message before finished) Yes, agree with Goran. The main issue is that MM competition this year was weak and in case we had a few really competitive MM efforts, no chance would h
Of course Martin... I just compare "similar" locations, where I consider PJ2 being a pretty equal one to zone 33 or 35. A M/S station in Zone 33 or 35 should have issues to beam a M2 or MM station in