Simply follow the rules and don't work non mults. Why is this a
problem? I have to wonder what is really going on that the Mult station
cannot determine of the guy they want to work is a multiplier or not.
Something smells bad here.
The new rules or "interpretation" will not allow you to work that guy
either for credit. He gets credit and you won'
t and unless you find him and dupe him in his log with the run station
he is lost.
This new interpretation makes me wonder what is really going on. What
is the rest of the story.
J6M CQ WW DX CW Contest 2011
J6/W0MU November 21 - December 1 2011
W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net
On 11/9/2011 5:56 AM, Igor Sokolov wrote:
> Mike,
> I worked some MS in the past and will be MS in coming CQWW CW. If I am at
> the mult position and suddenly start working non mult in order to mark them
> later as not valid in cabrillo I loose more then I gain. Those non mults
> whom I worked on the band are lost for me as potential points. They will not
> call run station when it gets on this band. We will not call them during S&P
> because they will show up in the logger as dupes. Plus I will have to make a
> lot of notes and editing cabrillo later.
> So there is no danger because there is no incentive.
> Yet this new rule provides the possibility to correct genuine mistakes and
> not punish the other side of such erroneous QSOs by removing them from our
> log.
>
> 73, Igor UA9CDC
>
>> 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
|