> Well, here it is, verbatim off of the KT0R SS report .............
>
> "The callsigns listed after the dupe check are the ones that didn't make it
> into
> the database. The criteria for a call to show up in the database is that it
> must
> show up in at least 4 of the submitted electronic logs. Callsigns that have
> been
> judged to be incorrect will show up here-along with the correct callsign.
> Incorrect
> calls are removed from your score, along with a penalty of 3 additional QSOs."
>
> Here were two examples, both locals, from the KT0R SS report:
>
> "W0DJC was not found in the SS database. Received QSO#=1. Calls with same
> check/section: K0KX W0ZQ WA2MNO WE0Q W0GQ"
> "KB0VCV was not found in the SS database. Received QSO#=1"
As I read that, calls can be absent for the database for two reasons:
1) They are judged incorrect.
2) They were found in less than 4 logs.
In all the explanations I've see so far, it isn't clear to me if "reason 2"
calls are
deducted, or just "noted" in the remarks (but not deducted). Because I know
that both W0DJC and KB0VCV are active local hams but not contesters, it doesn't
surprise me that they show up in KT0R's log, but in few (if any) logs outside
the
western suburbs of Minneapolis.
Sean, do you know if they were "deducted" or just "noted"?
73, Hans, K0HB
~~~
Observation the morning after the contest:
"A logging computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in
human history--with the possible exceptions of a borrowed Vibroplex and a
quart of tequila."
~~~
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|