Hi all, Just another solution. Only QSOs with participants conducted at least 100 (or so) contacts in the contest are eligible for the contest score. As simple as that. 73, Vladimir VE3IAE __________
Hi Mark, All correct, it would fundamentally change the game. Let's narrow the circle. No problem if a casual operator comes and makes a couple of contacts. Fine, if he even sends a log, he can compe
Gents, Is it really fair to allow the "unclaimed" QSOs in principle? An example: you and your competitor decided to jump and check another band. The band is dead but you found and worked eachother. A
Gents, Isn't it time to change a subject and to touch something else? The old poor horse named SO2R vs SO1R is dead long long ago. The recent WRTC is history. People say, another one to come, so let'
Sad news just came about Valery Khorkov, EU1MM, who passed away today after a long illness. Undoubtfully he used to be one of the strongest RTTY contesters Worldwide. We shall miss him. RIP, Valery.
This is not any kind of news for me and it is really de facto standard at least for me for contesting since 1969. To my honest suprise, it is not, for others. Besides, other things like IE, a single
It looks like paddles attract some extra attention of the security people... Last April my Bencher paddle really created such a headache for me... It was a long transcontinental flight, actually, 3 o
Basic principles remain basic principles always, regardless when they are studied or analized, is it 1966 or 2006. For sure, there ARE several different layers of correspondents. And the layers depen
Sorry, certainly it looks like I have to mention that the below had place in the EU land. 73, Vladimir VE3IAE - EU1SA -- _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Con
Please kindly consider the 2 following ideas. -- Would't it be better just to publish full contest results in 1-2 months after it's over? Virtually the interest to the online scores has come (IMO) be
Hi all, I got a feeling, it has been touched in the list but I missed it... Is there really a typo in the rules concerning SO group or something new? qt -- III. Single Operator Cathegories. ... A. Si
Sorry, can't resist and turn back to the "Phonetics". Some time ago I worked a station signing "Kilowatt-<number>-<single letter>. I asked him, is it a special event station or something else. The an
The above includes a question and an answer in the same time, intentionally or not. I mean an answer to the question, how the lower Phone band edge can be enforced. The CQ WW rules require an operat
Hans, Supposingly you worked 500 stations and all of them suggest the same as you, will you be happy to receive 500 "thank you" messages yourself? :-) 73, Vladimir VE3IAE -- "thank you" email via arr
Hans, Remember, "QSL is a final courtesy of a QSO"? :-) I for one would prefer LoTW confirmations i/o E-Mail thank you letters from everybody I worked. Thanks for the contest QSO and its LoTW confirm
I'm certainly second with that. With my 73 check I was asked several times last weekend like this, OK TKS but what's your check???... And it was quite funny to see that this kind of check solicites
For whatever reason sanity is not there yet in this respect. It's that easy to understand how and what... Let me remind you the situation you were in for sure. You call somebody during S&P especially
-- Maybe I am wrong. Maybe my voice will contradict others' wilingness to make pogs public, but... Let me paraphrase the above invitation. Yes, with an exaggioration, indeed. "Wanna see our log? Jus
CQWW PHONE is quite history while CQWW CW is still fresh. I just messed up the two contests. It's my mistake and I and returned back to OE1EMS with my appologies. 73, Vladimir VE3IAE -- ____________
Please, don't go too far with the abbreviations! It's obvious that an exchange from CT3 will always be 33 regardless what you actually send, is it really 33 or VV or whatever. I'm affraid, some peopl