[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] SO2R a new category?

Subject: [CQ-Contest] SO2R a new category?
From: w7ti@jps.net (Bill Turner)
Date: Fri Jun 2 08:32:20 2000
I don't see the problem in creating definitions for SO1R or SO2R.  To me, if
you can transmit and listen at the same time, you're 2R.  If you can listen
to two (or more) different frequencies at the same time, you're 2R.  If you
can not do either one of those, you're 1R.  Perhaps the legalistic types
will come up with some more finessing, but basically, that's it.  Making
that detectable would be nearly impossible, just like cheating on power or
number of ops.  That doesn't stop those categories from existing and it
shouldn't stop this one.


----- Original Message -----
From: <Jimk8mr@aol.com>
> My SO2R opinions aside, I agree with Tree and others that a solid,
> detectable, enforceable definition of SO2R must be developed before any
> category could be considered, and I think coming up with that will be
> Jim  K8MR

CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

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