Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Why\s+was\s+4U1WB\s+Disqualified\s+in\s+the\s+CQ\s+WPX\s+Contest\?\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Terry Zivney <n4tz@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 19:02:02 +0000 (UTC)
Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? As Masa, AJ3M, noted in his posting about the disqualification of 4U1WB in the 2017 CQ WPX SSB contest, I informed him that: "4U1WB violated rule V.C
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00238.html (11,128 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 14:51:12 -0500
How do they happen to be operating with that callsign, then? Is it illegal for them to use that callsign? Inquiring minds want to know. 73, Zack W9SZ _______________________________________________ C
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00243.html (13,876 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: "Masa Miura, AJ3M" <masa.miura.aj3m@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 15:59:32 -0400
Terry, I have a clarifying question about the following sentence in your email. Please note that it is not part of the rules. Because the 4U1WB callsign does not reflect the DXCC entity of USA, it is
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00245.html (14,614 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: "Masa Miura, AJ3M" <masa.miura.aj3m@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 16:21:24 -0400
Dear Terry: Your October 23 email to me and the post below did not refer to any prior notification to 4U1WB regarding the DQ. I looked for such an email in my inbox and spam folder after I found out
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00247.html (15,074 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Rudy Bakalov via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 16:49:14 -0400
Terry, You are trying to make a decision which is not yours to make. The status of the UN and its agencies has been established long time ago and it is not CQ Magazines prerogative to challenge or in
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00248.html (14,724 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 15:47:35 -0500
Terry, Thanks for the explanation, but I remain to be convinced. If you recognized that 4U1 stations were not disqualified previously, then you realized a precedent had been set. Discarding precedent
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00249.html (14,930 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Radio KHB <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 21:35:18 +0000
Terry, Your resolution was fair, timely, well explained, and transparent. Thank you! 73, de Hans, KHB "Just a boy and his radio" ** Resolution of problem 1) Rule V.C.2 will be clarified for the 2018
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00251.html (9,114 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Mark Bailey <kd4d@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 18:25:49 -0400
Hi Terry: I admire your decision to reverse 4U1WB's disqualification and clarify the rules so that this situation does not occur again. Thanks and 73, Mark, KD4D -- Sent from my Android device with K
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00252.html (14,498 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 17:25:33 -0500
Have to give credit where it is due: Terry deserves kudos for arriving at this resolution. 73, kelly, ve4xt Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00253.html (10,312 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 18:48:32 -0400
OK, so let me see if I get this straight... We have here a legally and properly licensed station, that has been such and been using their call for decades. The station is not a pirate, it is not a sp
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00254.html (16,335 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Terry Zivney <n4tz@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 22:50:20 +0000 (UTC)
Hi Masa, I quote from my message: "Since 4U1 prefixes can be in multiple countries, rule V.C.1 would also apply. The DXCC list includes 4U1UN and 4U1ITU as separate entities. So, the 4U1 prefix does
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00255.html (16,651 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 18:38:32 -0600
I could be wrong but I thought 4U1WB could only operate at the world bank location and 4U1UN from the UN Building in NY. I do not know if 4u1ITU is locked in to a specific location in EU. Thank you
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00257.html (13,758 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 01:58:36 -0400
Thanks for the resolution Terry. Sportsmanship is what it's all about. 73 Ria, N2RJ _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.cont
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00260.html (16,393 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: "Masa Miura, AJ3M" <masa.miura.aj3m@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 07:44:28 -0400
In response to the decision announced by Terry, N4TZ, to remove the 2017 WPX SSB DQ, I sent a private email to thank him for everything he has been doing as the Contest Director. I mentioned to him t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00261.html (10,160 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Chuck Dietz <w5prchuck@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 07:20:39 -0500
4U1WB should not have to sign "/" when they operate from their fixed, home location. They should be either considered a separate "country" or lumped in with 4U1UN with both counting as "UN" Similarly
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00262.html (16,677 bytes)

16. [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Fred Kleber <kleberf@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 17:38:26 +0000 (UTC)
OK, so if I follow Terry's logic correctly for rule V.C.1 (see below), what about the TO#* calls which are issued by France, but the DXCC entity can not be determined? Let's take TO1A for example.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00263.html (10,968 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: John Geiger <af5cc2@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 18:30:19 +0000
The TO and TX prefixes immediately came to mind for me also when I saw his post. 73 John AF5CC _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http:/
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00269.html (11,827 bytes)

18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: John Geiger <af5cc2@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 18:33:57 +0000
That is an interesting idea Chuck, but I think that 4U1UN and 4U1WB could be counted as 1 entity, because due to the DXCC rules, the physical separation between them (more than 75 miles) would them s
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00270.html (18,577 bytes)

19. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 11:59:12 -0700
Exactly right! And thank you for pointing out these obvious contradictions, Fred. AND, more to the point, in WPX, why does the station working 4U1 need to know where it is located? Everyone works
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00272.html (11,396 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest? (score: 1)
Author: N4ZR <n4zr@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 18:22:24 -0400
Enough, already! Terry has acknowledged he was wrong and has made Masa and 4U1WB whole again, so let's move on. Rumor has it there's a contest this weekend. 73, Pete N4ZR Check out the Reverse Beac
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-10/msg00274.html (18,426 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu