[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] PAQP Multipliers

To: CQ Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] PAQP Multipliers
From: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 09:00:40 -0400
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Oct 7, 2007, at 3:27 PM, Steve London wrote:

> So, could someone explain to me why the PAQP organizers have chosen  
> the
> following multipliers for in-state participants:
> 71 USA ARRL Sections
> 13 Canadian Entities
> The 13 Canadian entities are not the same as the Canadian sections  
> in SS. Nor
> are they the same as the 13 RAC sections used in other contests. In  
> fact, if you
> are a VY0 in Nunavut, you are totally SOL for the PAQP !

The reason for the difference between our sections and the new RAC  
sections was explained to me as an example:

Imagine if MA, CT NH, VT, RI, and ME were put in to a single section  
called NES.

> http://www.nittany-arc.net/paqsorules.htm . The html rules say "RAC  
> Sections",
> but when you download the PDF file of the rules it says "The  
> Canadian sections
> in use by the PAQSO party are somewhat different than those in use  
> by the RAC at
> this time. They are ... "

Thanks for pointing that out, Steve.  I'll remove the RAC section  
reference from the html rules.

> A little peer pressure, please, to get the PAQP organizers to wise  
> up next year !

        I am afraid that I am irredeemably stupid, Steve. Ask anyone... ;^)

-73 de Mike KB3EIA -

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>