| To: | "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC updated FAQ - Remote operation |
| From: | <kzerohb@gmail.com> |
| Date: | Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:35:22 -0700 |
| List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
I believe (as in "it is my opinion") that the 500m rule is to disallow multiple receive/transmit sites all under a single call sign, a "distributed multi-multi" so to speak. 73, de Hans, K0HB/K7 -----Original Message----- From: Paul O'Kane > If, nevertheless, contest organisers are happy to accept > remote control entries, I'd suggest there is no point in > having a 500m rule in the first place. _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
| Previous by Date: | [CQ-Contest] Is the Cluster losing its Luster, Paul Mackanos - K2DB |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [CQ-Contest] Remote Contesting, Martin Monsalvo, LU5DX |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC updated FAQ - Remote operation, Paul O'Kane |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC updated FAQ - Remote operation, Pete Smith |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |