Hi Bob,
I think the duelling CQ's argument is a bit of a red herring: even the best
ops say duelling CQs is only possible when the activity is light enough. If
activity is light, then it shouldn't matter.
If an operator is good enough that while adhering to the single-transmission
rule he can juggle two QSOs concurrently, that's a skill he should be proud
of.
73, kelly
ve4xt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Naumann - W5OV" <w5ov@w5ov.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R -- revised opinion?
> N8VW wrote:
>
> > Why is so2r somehow different?
>
> Good question Pat. I think the obvious answer is that we're talking
> about a single operator. Some persist in not understanding this
> distinction.
>
> Even so, I think this deserves some thought, and discussion.
>
> Leveraging technology in a way for a single operator to operate as if
> he were a multi-op may cross the line. Dueling CQ's may cross that
> line. I'm not sure.
>
> Bob Naumann - W5OV
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|