CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW impt notice: optional modification tocabrillo form

To: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW impt notice: optional modification tocabrillo format
From: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
Reply-to: Igor Sokolov <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:29:08 +0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
IMHO the difference is in intent. One thing is to brake rules deliberately. 
Another - genuine mistake.

73, Igor UA9CDC

> and the rules say the multiplier station shall only work new 
> multipliers......................  What is the difference.  It is ok to 
> break one rule but not the other?
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> J6M CQ WW DX CW Contest 2011
> J6/W0MU November 21 - December 1 2011
> W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net
>
>
> On 11/9/2011 7:06 AM, Igor Sokolov wrote:
>>> Sure, they might get a new multiplier responding to their CQ from time 
>>> to
>>> time, but isn't this better than them calling CQ and saying "sorry, 
>>> can't
>>> work you now, you're not a multiplier" to the rest of us?
>>>
>>> W5OV
>>
>> CQWW rules are pretty specific  "...The multiplier station cannot call 
>> CQ."
>>
>>
>> 73, Igor UA9CDC 

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

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