Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+DXC\s+Entry\s+Reclassified\s+to\s+High\s+Power\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] DXC Entry Reclassified to High Power (score: 1)
Author: Drew Vonada-Smith <drew@whisperingwoods.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:34:24 -0500
Rich & Contesters, This is exactly what happened to me in 2015.  I asked the same obvious question; If they worked me and gave an exchange, are they not by definition in the contest?  My affected QSO
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00081.html (22,343 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] DXC Entry Reclassified to High Power (score: 1)
Author: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 23:48:19 +0500
Drew, This subject has been discussed here on the reflector in the past and reasons were explained. I will briefly repete them. There are two schools of thoughts. Both have some merits and faults 1)
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00092.html (23,849 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] DXC Entry Reclassified to High Power (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:48:04 -0600
Would it not be prudent then for the WRTC people to immediately drop this contest from consideration. This contest has absolutely no credibility whatsoever and it appears that this reclassification w
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00105.html (22,655 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] DXC Entry Reclassified to High Power (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 19:28:19 -0600
The rules do not state that if a log is not sent in that QSO's will be tossed out. If this is what they mean then they have failed to state it. If I missed this in the rules my apologies. *16.* Penal
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00111.html (27,562 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] DXC Entry Reclassified to High Power (score: 1)
Author: "Jamie WW3S" <ww3s@zoominternet.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 22:20:00 -0400
............ Maybe we are having an English/Russian translation issue Igor. I do not know what would happen in WRTC I were to work a station that nobody else worked for a rare multiplier.............
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00112.html (8,936 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] DXC Entry Reclassified to High Power (score: 1)
Author: Igor Sokolov <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 12:53:24 +0500
Mike, I agree that RDXC approach to adjudication of logs should have been described in the rules. Having said that I do not know of any other contest sponsors who publish their methods of adjudicatio
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00120.html (14,560 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] DXC Entry Reclassified to High Power (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 09:22:32 -0600
CQWW does not toss out all instances where contacts cannot be confirmed. They were able to determine via many ways that the claimed contacts were not made in the recent case. It was not just because
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00124.html (16,048 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] DXC Entry Reclassified to High Power (score: 1)
Author: Drew Vonada-Smith <drew@whisperingwoods.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 11:10:13 -0500
I think we understand the arguments for the QSO elimination and the no credit both ways for busted calls.  Problem is, the arguments hold no water, as many point out below.  This is why no other majo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00125.html (17,344 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] DXC Entry Reclassified to High Power (score: 1)
Author: Christian Schneider <prickler.schneider@t-online.de>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 20:18:49 +0200
Am 06.10.2016 um 18:10 schrieb Drew Vonada-Smith: Tossing out every contact that is a nuisance to verify is no solution. Tossing out uniques that are causal contacts is also baloney. These contacts a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00133.html (11,272 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu