Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Log\s+checking\s+deadlines\s+as\s+a\s+function\s+of\s+cheating\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Log checking deadlines as a function of cheating (score: 1)
Author: kr2q@optimum.net
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 21:33:42 +0000 (GMT)
The following is my 2 cents' worth.... I think that the concept of a shortened deadline so as to impact those who would "cheat" is mostly off base (ie, wrong). As I see it, the only "advantage" of wa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00018.html (8,457 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Log checking deadlines as a function of cheating (score: 1)
Author: Ed K1EP <k1ep.list@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 17:21:06 -0500
Here is mine. "Work expands into the time allocated to it." Shorten the deadline, make exceptions for the few who have legit excuses, like remote dxpeditions, etc. ___________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00019.html (8,035 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Log checking deadlines as a function of cheating (score: 1)
Author: "Shelby Summerville" <k4ww@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 18:06:47 -0500
Doug KR2Q wrote: "That being said, it is my opinion that the vast majority (the overwhelmingly vast majority) of entrants are not LOG cheats (let's skip power)." If anything is "skipped", that is a p
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00020.html (8,001 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Log checking deadlines as a function of cheating (score: 1)
Author: "Marty Bluhm" <w8aks55@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:52:53 -0800
Doug, I have to agree with you. The point has been made TIME AND TIME AGAIN, IF A CHEATER IS GOING TO CHEAT , HE IS GOING TO CHEAT (the caps are intentional). This horse has been ridden many many tim
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00021.html (11,471 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu