Re: [CQ-Contest] cqww ssb spotting report

[Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>]

KI9A wrote:
>I think illegal power & watching the cluster (while entering UA) are FAR FAR
worse, & potentially damaging to these stations you talk of, Stu. This is what
we need to focus on, not some knucklehead spotting himself. Why is nothing
ever said about these other offenses??

        Chuck, your second point above (Assisted claiming Unassisted) is 
under
control...at least for the CQ WW (see below).  Regarding power, in my 
experience
more contests are won by better RX capability than having the loudest TX
signal.  An alligator can run 20 kW and he is still an alligator who won't
hear the weak ones responding (and most guys I know doing this ARE alligators).

                                                73,  Bill  W4ZV

P.S.  As a related aside, I find it interesting that the #1 issue for voters
in our election was not security or economic issues, but VALUES...which is
exactly what we are discussing here.

http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2001-07/msg00130.html

        Just got my August (2001) CQ and read the following in the section 
titled
"Packet":

"The CQ WW Contest Committee has developed the means of extracting
information supplied to us by sysops from around the world and applying it
to a questionable log.  By these means we found several operators in the SSB
contest who did not claim the assisted category but used packet.  Their
calls do not appear in the score listings."

        VERY BIG KUDOS AND THANK YOU to the CQ WW Committee!

                                                73,  Bill  W4ZV


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest