Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:wc1m73@gmail.com: 123 ]

Total 123 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 11:21:32 -0400
Field Day is inherently a multi-op event. There's no Single-Op category, though there are a couple of "one or two operator" categories that allow up to two people. So it's OK to use the privileges of
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00241.html (9,958 bytes)

42. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 12:01:22 -0400
I think it's somewhat silly and a bit of a stretch to call the presence of the control operator "assistance". That person isn't doing anything, other than lending the contest operator use of his/her
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00245.html (12,766 bytes)

43. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 14:42:36 -0400
My problem with your definition is the word "presence". So, if I go over to your house, and you sit in a chair in the radio room watching me operate a contest, is it multi-op? No, definitely not. Mer
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00266.html (19,031 bytes)

44. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 19:47:45 -0400
With all due respect, Ron, you missed my point completely. If anyone is armchair lawyering, it's those who are nitpicking that a person's presence in the operating room constitutes "assistance" or mu
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00270.html (24,073 bytes)

45. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:06:00 -0400
A number of you have said that KP2MM should have been DQed because he operated beyond the privileges of his license. I've argued that this isn't true because a properly-licensed control operator was
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00272.html (18,939 bytes)

46. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:26:06 -0400
I'm not sure, but I believe you can flag the earlier contacts as unclaimed. Unfortunately, Cabrillo doesn't have a built-in way to do this. In fact, my logger deletes unclaimed QSOs from the log. We
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00273.html (10,624 bytes)

47. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:06:04 -0400
Dave, I'm not ignoring anything. You have presented this statement... ...as a given. You can stop right there because I don't agree with the statement. My point is that ARRL contest rules do not expl
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00283.html (12,865 bytes)

48. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:13:51 -0400
Nice research work, Brett! This certainly calls the intentions of the OP (op and original poster) into question, but I don't think it changes the fact that the ARRL rules are not clear when it comes
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00284.html (12,032 bytes)

49. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:36:52 -0400
The FCC rules explicitly state that the control op must be present at "the control point" unless the station is automatically controlled (e.g., a beacon.) The wording makes it clear that the control
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00309.html (28,373 bytes)

50. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL single op definition (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:03:21 -0400
Mike, you've gotten right to the heart of the matter by emphasizing the word OPERATOR. To me, this highlights the fact that KV4FZ was an operator *in name only*. As far as we know. he didn't do any o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00311.html (11,505 bytes)

51. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:23:39 -0400
Club station licenses are granted to a ?trustee? designated by an officer of the club. There are only two requirements: 1) The trustee must be a licensed Amateur, and 2) the club must have at least f
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00312.html (24,820 bytes)

52. [CQ-Contest] A smoking gun? (was RE: KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012) (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:33:16 -0400
(a) The station licensee is responsible for the proper operation of the station in accordance with the FCC Rules. When the control operator is a different amateur operator than the station licensee,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00313.html (8,051 bytes)

53. Re: [CQ-Contest] A smoking gun? (was RE: KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012) (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 19:12:06 -0400
I think we agree in principle, but our reasoning is slightly different. You referred to the "owner of the station". That's not a factor in this. What matters is who is the station licensee. That does
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00326.html (13,438 bytes)

54. Re: [CQ-Contest] New CQ WW DX Rule Bans Post-Contest Log Changes (score: 1)
Author: Dick Green <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 01:37:07 -0400
I've never been in favor of super-strict interpretation of the rules, but I think one can make a legitimate argument that *any* editing of the log after the contest constitutes operating outside the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00026.html (37,904 bytes)

55. Re: [CQ-Contest] New CQ WW DX Rule Bans Post-Contest Log Changes (score: 1)
Author: Dick Green <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:12:47 -0400
Depends on the contest and whether you count the editing time as part of the break. If it's an unlimited operating time contest, like CQ WW, then editing during the contest could cut into your operat
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00034.html (44,160 bytes)

56. Re: [CQ-Contest] New CQ WW DX Rule Bans Post-Contest Log Changes (score: 1)
Author: Dick Green <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2012 12:29:19 -0400
It's still in the rules for ARRL Sweepstakes (rule 2.7). I thought it was in the WPX rules, but I don't see it there. 73, Dick WC1M Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ C
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00040.html (50,466 bytes)

57. Re: [CQ-Contest] [YCCC] Why ARRL SSB Contest is Not My Favorite (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 14:29:38 -0500
A few years ago, some idiot on the CAC tried to explore the possibility of making ARRL DX a more interesting (i.e., fun) contest. I'm not talking about radical proposals like distance-based scoring t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00091.html (13,560 bytes)

58. Re: [CQ-Contest] [YCCC] Why ARRL SSB Contest is Not My Favorite (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 16:54:17 -0500
Frank, Actually, I was the person who suggested the study. I did so for four reasons: 1) Because I noticed that ARRL DX had fallen to third place in log submissions behind CQ WW and CQ WPX, 2) Becaus
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00101.html (17,555 bytes)

59. Re: [CQ-Contest] Improving voice recordings for phone contests (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 11:51:55 -0500
FYI, Win-Test soundcard support has a built-in variable tempo feature. We discovered that at W2PV @ WW1WW this weekend when our recordings sounded strangely speeded up. We ended up turning it off bec
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00145.html (13,257 bytes)

60. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL is not my favourite (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 13:53:01 -0500
Absolutely not! But all contests need to be fun for a majority (I could say most) of the participants. Otherwise, why are we operating in them? Because that's what we've always done? I hope not. If c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00147.html (12,499 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu