Luc,
I do not think this will happen. Such cheaters will have to comment out too
many QSOs then. Not only they will loose a lot of points they can be also
DQed on the basis of unsportsmanship.
73, Igor UA9CDC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Luc Moreira" <py8azt@dxbrasil.net>
To: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Cc: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW impt notice: optional modification tocabrillo
format
> As I could understand, a team could operate as M/2, and depending the
> others participants score, they could comment out some QSOs and send in
> the
> log as M/S, and still into the rules.
>
> It's like open a window (or wide door) to top notch cheating level on
> Mult-Op category.
>
> I hope there is nobody out there willing do it.
>
> 73, Luc
> __
> PW7T Team member
> WRTC.2010 Brazilian Team Leader
> PY8AZT (also PT7AG, PX8C, ZZ8Z, ZY7C)
> LABRE, ARRL, CWJF & Fortaleza DX Group Member
>
>
>
>
>
> 2011/11/8 W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
>
>> Wait................
>>
>> So a Multi/Single can break the rules and have their contacts removed
>> yet the other station gets to keep the contact even though the station
>> they worked violated the rules? So what is to stop the mult station
>> from running and just marking the non mults as zero pointers?
>>
>> This sounds like trouble waiting to happen especially with some folks
>> who will stretch the rules to the max.
>>
>> Explain to me how the mult station ends up working non mults?
>>
>> Mike W0MU
>>
>> J6M CQ WW DX CW Contest 2011
>> J6/W0MU November 21 - December 1 2011
>> W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net
>>
>>
>> On 11/8/2011 4:54 AM, kr2q@optimum.net wrote:
>> > Hi...
>> >
>> > I just received an inquiry (as shown below) and I thought it was worth
>> posting here too.
>> >
>> > "We were M/S and find that we worked some non-mults with the mult
>> station. What should we
>> > do?"
>> >
>> > New this year for CQWW, you can now include a contact row in your
>> cabrillo file that WILL NOT
>> > COUNT. This means the log checking will ignore this QSO for you, but
>> will NOT ignore it for the
>> > "other guy." This way, YOUR log is clean AND the other guy does not
>> > get
>> dinged.
>> >
>> > How?
>> >
>> > Edit your cabrillo output as follows:
>> >
>> > For ONLY the row (or rows) you want to be ignored, insert an "X" (no
>> quotes" in front of the
>> > "QSO" portion of the row (no spaces).
>> >
>> > So a row that originally look like this:
>> > QSO: 7011 CW 2009-11-28 0000 KT3Y 599 5 YU1LA 599 15
>> 1
>> >
>> > Should be modified to look like this:
>> > XQSO: 7011 CW 2009-11-28 0000 KT3Y 599 5 YU1LA 599 15
>> 0
>> >
>> > For M/S, also note that you should change the "Transmitter ID" (last
>> column) from "1" to "0"
>> >
>> > For full details (video) of the entire CQWW 2011 update, go to:
>> >
>> > http://www.pvrc.org/webinar/cqww_2011.wmv
>> >
>> > And THANKS again to the PVRC for hosting this.
>> >
>> > de Doug KR2Q
>> > no "usual" disclaimer
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|