Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Re\.\s+TO7A\s+Debacle\s*$/: 28 ]

Total 28 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Felipe J. Hernández <np4zet@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 21:41:17 -0400
BIll, Dont feel too bad, he still has the North American record from last year where he beat these other fine operators 1TO7A2013SO HP ALL13,765,575 7,916 161 564 48.0UT5UGR[Cert] <http://cqww.com/ce
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00325.html (8,097 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: donovanf@starpower.net
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 01:11:51 -0400 (EDT)
Hi Felipe, Now that we all know how the 2014 TO7A log was padded with fake QSOs with stations who didn't send in their logs, the same pattern can probably now be found in the public log for TO7A's "2
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00327.html (9,362 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 08:13:34 -0600
Now that we all know how the 2014 TO7A log was padded with fake QSOs with stations who didn't send in their logs, the same pattern can probably now be found in the public log for TO7A's "2013 North
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00330.html (7,913 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 10:48:34 -0600
I wonder exactly what you have to do to be given a lifetime ban? This was no accident. It was a blatant attempt to defraud the entire contest and process. Some things are forgivable but this was plan
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00337.html (10,772 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: "Mike Smith VE9AA" <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 18:33:17 -0300
I see a couple locals (VE1/9) who are not CW ops (or in one case even licensed for CW) in the 2013 TO7A log. Yup, you guessed it. No logs sent to CQWW by these stns. -- The 2013 public logs are all a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00341.html (7,760 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: "Roberto Rey" <cwdude@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 09:14:40 -0500
I totally agree with Mike, but I doubt that will ever happen. Contest authorities lack the XXX to do something like this. 73 de Rob HK3CW -- Original Message -- From: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00349.html (12,203 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: donovanf@starpower.net
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 10:31:35 -0400 (EDT)
Hi Mike, Exactly the same log padding technique is present the the 2013 and 2014 TO7A CQWW CW public logs. In both cases proven well beyond a reasonable doubt. Many of UT5UGR's logs are public, avail
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00351.html (16,516 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 09:33:18 -0500
Can anyone recall when a contester's reputation has imploded so spectacularly before? 73, kelly ve4xt _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00352.html (9,074 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: "Richard F DiDonna NN3W" <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 11:58:53 -0400
You do realize that UT5UGR has been DQed before - the 2007 or 2008 IARU... 73 Rich NN3W Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone Can anyone recall when a contester's reputation has imploded so spectacular
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00356.html (9,118 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Herbert Schoenbohm <herbs@vitelcom.net>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 12:52:26 -0400
There are others in the record book essentially in perpetuity. The fact that CQ Contesting still posts some of the biggest malefactors, i.e. the low band QRP world records of an infamous station in K
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00359.html (9,122 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: "Yuri" <ve3dz@rigexpert.net>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 08:39:21 -0400
Good morning Frank. I see you listed UGR's WRTC results and also all his Multi Op participations below. Do I understand you correctly that you also question all these scores? Do you know that all WRT
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00374.html (17,647 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Louis C Loria via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 14:58:41 -0400
I am not sure this equals it but in the 1950s wasn't there a big contest weekend where the FCC got something like 27 of those "California Kilowatts". Anyone else remember that? 73. Louis C Loria W0QQ
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00379.html (10,459 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 04:14:10 -0500
Yuri, This needed to be said. I doubt Frank was thinking very clearly when he listed anything other than single op entries or entries where the log submission was known to be in Dim's control and did
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00383.html (22,304 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Mats Strandberg <sm6lrr@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 14:51:28 +0300
Very well expressed Stan, Anyone that openly admits a mistake, apologizes for it, and expresses a sincere desire to improve, could ultimately be forgiven (by most people at least). However, and this
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00384.html (26,247 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 07:53:26 -0500
Ok, A violator was found, and has been prosecuted by both the contest sponsors, and in the eyes of the rest of the contesting world. I may have missed this next part. But what is happening next? The
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00385.html (24,884 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Michael Adams <mda@n1en.org>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 16:50:43 +0000
The WRTC2018 qualification rules include this passage: That, being excluded from this year's results, and being the public focus of quite a bit of unwanted attention (now and in the future) are proba
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00387.html (10,171 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 12:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
Mats, well said.   Your 5th paragraph especially bears repeating so I will - We are a community based on friendship, and we have an important function to collectively bring people into the right thin
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00389.html (28,581 bytes)

18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 13:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
Joe, the penalty is that the man was DQ'd. When I was a lad and needed correction I got whatever penalty my Dad thought warranted.  There was no "long for the future" whippings to come due.  Rather t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00390.html (30,925 bytes)

19. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 16:20:18 -0500
Thats all I was wondering, if the one time DQ or a penalty like the quarterback is getting. Joe WB9SBD Sig The Original Rolling Ball Clock Idle Tyme Idle-Tyme.com http://www.idle-tyme.com On 5/15/201
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00391.html (29,269 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle (score: 1)
Author: brian coyne <g4odv@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 22:21:49 +0000 (UTC)
Stan & Mats, Let us be quite clear, Dim's actions were no mistake  but a pre-meditated and planned deception knowing the risks  involved if discovered.A public apology would be the right thing to do
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00392.html (29,101 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]
This search system is powered by Namazu