I see the notation that this came from the April copy of CQ. There goes my first three paragraphs! <g> A lot of familiar or semi-familiar calls on that list. I do have to wonder if any of the station
IMO, this is where the whole notion some have that "the CC doesn't need to explain their actions so the cheaters don't know how to beat the system " falls apart. Transparency is a good thing and I'm
OK - Here goes: The following is an excerpt from the results article for the CQWW SSB 2016 contest. This is as much detail as will be made available publicly, in writing, regarding who was DQ'ed for
Hi Bob, Thank you for your illuminating post regarding DQs in the 2016 CQWW SSB contest. Because CQ Magazine is not able to stick to their shipping schedule, this discussion grew beyond what was nece
Hi Bob, Thank you for your detailed explanation. I guess what concerns me and some others, particularly non-US amateurs is that the DQ list was solely competitors outside of CONUS and Canada. Persona
A couple of clarifications to my earlier comments: While the current director of the CQWW is in the USA, the vast majority of the volunteers involved in the analysis work is spread out all around the
I did not renew my sub after the last fiasco. Too bad that the owners can't seem to listen to good advice like this. Thank you for your illuminating post regarding DQs in the 2016 CQWW SSB contest. B
There are for sure cultural/ethical differences that can explain the low "zero" appearance of DQs from Continental USA or Canada - at least related to Self-Spotting and Non-Assisted category. HOWEVER
One of those DQed is a YB who made about 50 QSO's, and may not even understand what self-spotting is. But the worst that happens to a USA contester, who knowingly or carelessly works stations out-of-
I would like to hear your thoughts on the following: In the past, I have been operating below 14.150, knowing full well this is not a U.S. phone allocation. A U.S. stations calls me. I tell him he is
Please start naming names and let the cleanup begin. Maybe we need an anonymous tip line? That is the crutch of the problem we are all "friends" but don't want to rat them out so nothing changes. W0M
Not many seem to know this. I think CQWW CC is a team with a lot of talent and energy. http://cqww.com/contact.htm 73, Jukka OH6LI _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing l
Agreed. They violated FCC rules which I believe the rules state is a DQ? At the very least we all agree to abide by them. Operating outside the band is about as big a violation you can get. It is def
in every contests. I doubt it is intentional, just careless spot clicking. John KK9A One of those DQed is a YB who made about 50 QSO's, and may not even understand what self-spotting is. But the wor
CQWW CC should consider making sure at least one member is from EU and that a process to review all DQs exist so that if any CC member objects to the list of who?s on or who?s not ? they have the pow
I'd like to suggest that wandering out of band during a contest, while illegal and against contest rules, could happen to any contest team. Picture four guys who have planned to run a contest for a y
Notice that I didn't specifically say that any out-of-band QSO should result in a DQ. A more appropriate penalty, for CQWW, would be to deduct 3 more QSO's for every out-of-band QSO. This is the same
I was in this situation and I just logged them and moved on. Who am I to know the rules in someone else's country? _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@c
Many stations, including even the current CQWW Contest director, have at times worked stations outside the US bands. I have been at several DX locations in contests where US stations have called me w
I was contesting for the fun of it, but that is rapidly losing its luster with these kinds of exchanges! Chuck W5PR Sent from Mail for Windows 10 _______________________________________________ CQ-Co