[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Rules and the District of Columbia

To: <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Rules and the District of Columbia
From: "Buck - N4PGW" <n4pgw-list1@towncorp.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 11:23:14 -0400
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Ken's statement below makes perfect sense.  Make DC consistent.

Personally I believe that DC deserves the position of being a state
multiplier.  Unlike national forests, it does have a city, police force and
government to oversee it.  

Again, while I would disagree that it needs to be mixed with MD, I don't
think it should have it's own multiplier in one band and not in another.
That does not make sense.  As for Canada and other countries, maybe they
should be looked at.  

I would understand if CQ has a contest with different multipliers than the
ARRL, but at least each of their contests should be consistent with the
others in this regard.  There is no reason a standard cannot be common among
all similar contests within the same organization.

My $.05 worth. (inflation)


> -----Original Message-----
Personally, I think clarity of status is the most important thing.  
In the case of NAQP, the mult status of DC is pretty clear, so any
that it be changed should be based on something like consistency with other
contests.  If DC were treated the same way in every contest that had "state"
multipliers, wouldn't it make it easier for everyone?

CQ-Contest mailing list

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