Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Station\s+Inspections\s*$/: 66 ]

Total 66 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Steve Sacco NN4X <nn4x@embarqmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 23:42:15 -0400
People don't seem too put off by amateur events like "The Olympics", or "The Little League World Series". ;-) _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contes
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00201.html (10,047 bytes)

42. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: " Jack KZ4USA" <videorov@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 23:47:42 -0400
This contesting is starting to become a joke when they start coming around and checking all those stations which I don't see how they are going to check them all anyway, Its just the idea of this. It
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00202.html (8,120 bytes)

43. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Jimk8mr@aol.com
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:19:24 EDT
We in our no-monetary-prize environment are not alone. In the world of tournament bridge - another no-prize-money competition - last year it was deemed necessary to prohibit not only the use of, but
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00203.html (9,223 bytes)

44. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: "Robert Chudek - K0RC" <k0rc@citlink.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 09:15:02 -0500
I agree, it's not the Americas Cup but I suggest it is the equivalent. What other competitive event (in Amateur Radio) holds the prestige of the ARRL and CQ dx contests? Where else can you test your
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00204.html (9,811 bytes)

45. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 06:41:43 -0500
That's correct, Jack, it is not the America's Cup. Some contesters wish it was, and why not? One of the things that holds contesting back is flagrant cheating by a handful at the tops of the standin
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00205.html (9,218 bytes)

46. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Barry <w2up@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 12:48:33 +0000
The Olympics is far from an amateur event. Barry W2UP -- Barry Kutner, W2UP Lakewood, CO _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00207.html (10,958 bytes)

47. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: <w1md@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 07:34:42 -0800
I suppose the whole "it's against the rules as defined by the FCC" isn't a consideration anymore...if we're willing to make statements like the "it's only 3db". 1501 Watts is as much against the rule
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00208.html (11,659 bytes)

48. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: KI9A@aol.com
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:34:26 EDT
I have no problems with enforcement of the rules, but, random visits, to personal property, that's crossing the line in my very humble opinion. I would no doubt take a DQ, than to let a stranger in m
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00210.html (9,667 bytes)

49. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: <w1md@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 07:37:14 -0800
And THAT is most assuredly still your choice...for the time being anyway. W1MD As for me, I'll be sitting behind a radio somewhere having fun in a contest... _________________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00211.html (10,789 bytes)

50. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 09:46:45 -0500
I'll agree to this also. That's where at least for me where the wall of shame to me would be incredible. Imaging both in the magazine and on the web your station on a list of cheaters. and publish th
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00212.html (11,581 bytes)

51. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Jimk8mr@aol.com
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:45:06 EDT
A clarification... this ban only applies to the top level nationally ranked tournaments. For the events for the rest of us mere mortals, myself included, use of phones is prohibited, but mainly out o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00213.html (8,820 bytes)

52. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Steve Sacco NN4X <nn4x@embarqmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 11:04:01 -0400
Hi Chuck - I don't think there's any disconnect in comparing elite amateur athletes of any kind kind against elite radiosport competitors. Anyone can participate in events which would allow them to q
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00216.html (9,482 bytes)

53. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Steve Sacco NN4X <nn4x@embarqmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 11:10:57 -0400
Well...they're not "random" - the competitor would be warned that there may be a visit. If they're KNOWN cheaters, why not make an effort to eradicate them, or put them on the path of playing by the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00217.html (9,406 bytes)

54. [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: "Ken Claerbout" <k4zw@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 17:17:00 -0400
Last post for me on this topic. Lets look at the rule again. "..must agree to a potential visitation at any time during the contest by an observer appointed by the CQ WW Contest Committee." Sure in a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00223.html (9,248 bytes)

55. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Hank Greeb <n8xx@arrl.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 17:24:37 -0400
Shucks, anyone can be competitive if he/she spends upwards past $50,000 or more on a station, towers, etc., and practices his/her skill in various contests. Not to mention a quiet RF location, on a h
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00224.html (10,389 bytes)

56. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 01:02:55 -0500
"Shucks, anyone can be competitive if he/she spends upwards past $50,000 or more on a station, towers, etc., and practices his/her skill in various contests. Not to mention a quiet RF location, on a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00231.html (10,601 bytes)

57. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 13:54:34 +0100
Really? I believe open logs are one of the most welcome changes in recent years. Thanks, but we don't need to ask. When you enter CQWW your logs are on the web for everyone to see. Looks like paranoi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00235.html (9,454 bytes)

58. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Hank Greeb <n8xx@arrl.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 15:15:35 -0400
David: You're entitled to your opinion, I beg you to agree that I'm entitled to my opinion, and I'm sure the organizers of the contest are entitled to their opinion, and entitled to enforce it, wheth
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00243.html (12,031 bytes)

59. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: <k8gt@mi.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:31:19 -0400
Thank Ken, for some clear headed, calm and rational discussion on the subject. It has taken all these years to get to this point and now "the sky is gonna fall" ? ? ? Take a deep breath guys, there i
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00248.html (10,668 bytes)

60. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: "Edward" <sawyered@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 06:21:17 -0400
Personally, it doesn't bother me if someone wants to come and observe me contesting. It would surprise me if my station was deemed "important enough" for someone to take their time off of actually co
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00255.html (10,585 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu