CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge

To: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge
From: "Stan Stockton" <k5go@cox.net>
Reply-to: Stan Stockton <k5go@cox.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:14:30 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Dick,

I agree with Mark and others on this.

I believe the intent of the rule was that the single operator would tune 
his radio to find stations to work.  The source that would provide a 
list of stations to work, other than the operator tuning his radio to 
find stations, is immaterial.

The result is the same and it does not fall into the intent of a single 
operator unassisted entry if a list of stations appears on a bandmap for 
him to work.

If there had been exceptions that would be OK for a single operator to 
have a list of stations provided they would have been specifically 
listed.  The etc was, in my opinion,  added to encompass all other types 
of spotting that could not be envisioned at the time the rule was 
written.

Stan, K5GO



> WC1M said:
>
>> (operating arrangements involving other individuals,
>> DX-alerting nets, packet, Internet, etc)
>>
>> The phrase in parenthesis defines the terms ...
>> and it doesn't include anything like local Skimmer.
>
>
> Dick, I believe the phrase does include things "like local Skimmer" 
> and the
> "etc" drives it home.  To me the definition clearly includes Skimmer.
>
> Mark, N5OT
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1505 - Release Date: 
> 6/16/2008 7:20 AM
>
> 

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

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