How productive is calling for a specific multiplier? I'm thinking not very
or everyone would be doing it...
>I called for specific mults from time to time and it can work.
As to the later, it would depend on how you acted on that information,
wouldn't it?
>Exactly!
Mike W0MU
--- On Tue, 1/12/10, Richard Zalewski <dick.w7zr@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Richard Zalewski <dick.w7zr@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Did I cheat in NAQP CW?
> To: "Julius Fazekas" <phriendly1@yahoo.com>
> Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com, "Robert Brandon" <rb@austin.rr.com>
> Date: Tuesday, January 12, 2010, 8:29 AM
> #3 Ok, where does this put me--- Late
> in the contest I call "CQ Contest Looking for Rhode Island"? A Rhode
> Island station calls that has to be ok IMHO but I would guess that if
> someone came on freq and said there is a RI up 5 that would put me
> assisted or multi. Right?
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 5:47 AM,
> Julius Fazekas <phriendly1@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> Using
> callbook names also can backfire... Some of us do not use our "legal"
> names. Some change things up just to keep folks honest or is it just
> to make it interesting? ;o)
>
>
> 73,
> Jul?
>
> Julius Fazekas
> N2WN
>
> Tennessee Contest Group
> http://www.k4ro.net/tcg/index.html
> http://groups.google.com/group/tcg1?hl=en
>
>
> Tennessee QSO Party
> http://www.tnqp.org/
>
> Elecraft K2/100 #4455
> Elecraft K3/100 #366
> Elecraft K3/100 #1875
>
>
> --- On Mon, 1/11/10, Robert Brandon <rb@austin.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> > From: Robert Brandon <rb@austin.rr.com>
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Did I cheat in NAQP CW?
>
> > To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> > Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 3:25 PM
>
>
>
> > 1. IMHO, the callsign history
> > feature -- assuming you use only the data you have accumulated -- is
> > okay. I don't see that as
> very
> > different from going
> > to Dayton every year and getting to know a lot of
>
> > people. But you use it at
> > your own risk when folks do something like use
> "Ken" in
> > memoriam or operate
> > from a different state.
> >
> > Using the callbook is different. If everybody used
>
> > it, no one would copy
> > exchanges and that's an important part of the
> game.
> >
> > 2. The purest of the purists would say make no changes to your log
> > once the event is over, but a much bigger majority say it's
> okay to
>
> > check your log
> > before you send it in. (Remember post contest
> > duping?) Just use your own
> > notes. So if the software makes it easier as you
> log
> > subsequent Qs, I'd say
> > that's okay. But I think the post contest log
>
> > checkers go a bit too far.
> >
> > 3. All of us get unsolicited info once in a
> > while. Just don't solicit it.
> >
> >
> > Robert K5PI
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>
> > [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com]
> > On Behalf Of Art Boyars
> > Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:55 AM
> > To: cq-contest@contesting.com
>
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] Did I cheat in NAQP CW?
> >
> > #1 is sort-of serious. #2 is in the
> > angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin
> > category. #3 is mostly tongue sort-of in cheek.
> >
> > 1. If it's OK to use "call history"
> files, is it OK
>
> > to look up states in
> > the (on-line) callbook. Why should one list of
> > historical data be OK, and
> > the other not? (I did NOT look up anybody's
> state or
> > name in the 'Test.)
> >
>
> > 2. I worked a guy whose state I know. And he
> > did indeed send that state
> > (to me AND to the guy who beat me out on the first
> > call). When I worked him
> > on the second band, I knew his state would be a
> mult.
>
> > When I typed in his
> > call the logging software filled in the report for me,
> but
> > did not indicate
> > it was a new mult. Hmmm? Oh! It says
> > "MD" I must have entered his state
>
> > as MD the first time. I guess I was listening to my
> > report being sent while
> > I typed in his report, and unconsciously typed in my
> own
> > state. No
> > problem. I rolled back in the log and fixed his
> state
>
> > in the first QSO, and
> > continued working the 'Test.
> >
> > Now, my own opinion is that anything I fix DURING the
> > contest is OK -- but I
> > had been considering errors that I recognized right
>
> > away. In this case, I
> > would not have noticed the error except for the
> fill-in
> > feature of the
> > logging software.
> >
> > 3. Late in the 'Test I made a desperate jump to
> 40M
> > (which was already
>
> > pretty dead by the time I started the 'Test). I
> heard
> > somebody tuning up,
> > and a well-know station in GA called CQ NA. I
> > listened for a moment, and
> > heard him get no answers. So I called him by name,
>
> > and said "You are vy
> > loud but nobody is here. GL"
> >
> > Did I make him multi-op? (He did keep calling
> > CQ.) Should we never give
> > ANY info that might help the other guy, including
> "VY LOUD"
>
> > or (as my buddy
> > N6XI once said to me) "P**S WEAK". BTW, I
> reserve the
> > right to tell N3AM he
> > is very loud. I think that from the top of his
> tower
> > John can see my
> > antenna ...if he looks down.
>
> >
> > 73, Art K3KU
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
>
> --
> Tnx es 73
> Dick W7ZR
> www.w7zr.com
>
> Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|