On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 06:22:01PM -0400, Jimk8mr@aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 3/17/2008 5:33:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> kenharker@kenharker.com writes:
>
> The potential of using multiple remote locations is a valid concern and
> one that contest sponsors need to make sure is prohibited and communicated
> to
> the contest community through rules clarifications, changes, or FAQs.
>
> =============================
>
> What is the problem with using multiple remote locations? Why is this any
> different from what I do in CW SS, operating from several different physical
> stations during the course of the contest?
"Using multiple remote stations for the same contest operation" I guess
would be a more specific summary of my point. If a contest permits you
to operate from station A for 24 hours and then station B for 24 hours,
then I'd have no problem with A and B both being remote stations. What
would be objectionable is using remote stations A and B under the same call
sign (for example, if they are in the same DXCC entity) to contribute to
one score.
> So long as there is no attempt to selectively work or not work any other
> particular station - the "captive rover" issue of the VHF world - who cares?
>
> It would be a real hoot to work 24 hours from CT3 and then connect up for
> the next 24 from 9M6. Bring it on!
>
>
> 73 - Jim K8MR
>
>
>
> **************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money &
> Finance. (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
--
Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
kenharker@kenharker.com
http://www.kenharker.com/
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|