As far as I am concerned, you can't ignore any of the rules. I don't find
the argument that since contest sponsors don't check this item, a very
compelling reason not to follow the rules.
Having worked with kids all my life, it reinforces why kids seem to feel
anything is ok, as long as they are not caught. - and we thought it was a
"kid" thing! The rules are... enforcement is something different.
Bill, W5VX
-----Original Message-----
From: John Geiger [mailto:n5ten@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 6:07 PM
To: Bill Parry; cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Check numbers again
But it also says:
The required exchange consists of:
4.4. Check (the last two digits of the year you were
first licensed);
If I can ignore that one, why can't I also ignore rule
4.1?
73s John AA5JG
--- Bill Parry <bparry@rgv.rr.com> wrote:
> The rules say:
>
> Exchange: The required exchange consists of:
> 4.1. A consecutive serial number;
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf
> Of John Geiger
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 2:06 PM
> To: Gerry Hull; Zack Widup; Cq-Contest Reflector
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Check numbers again
>
> Given that most contesters are used to copying 599
> or
> 5nn in the exchange, would it be ok to use 599 as
> the
> serial number for every QSO, as long as my log
> showed
> that it was the SN sent for each QSO? That should
> be
> easier for people to copy as opposed to all
> different
> sorts of serial numbers.
>
> 73s John AA5JG
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|