CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] In the light of the 2013 CQ WW DX CW Claimed scores.

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] In the light of the 2013 CQ WW DX CW Claimed scores.
From: Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 12:59:18 -0600 (CST)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Oh?
 
Which scores?  Why do you think they're unexplainable?
 
A blanket assertion like this without details directly or indirectly smears, or 
could smear, the reputations quite a few operators.  
 
While I can't speak for anyone else, I'd certainly want more information about 
what is allegedly happening before even beginning to consider revamps or 
changes, let alone agreeing to them.
 
73


On 12/04/13, Martin , LU5DX wrote:

I really hope at least some of you would agree that a revamp of the
observer program is needed.

There are scores that are really unexplainable.

Hopefully cheaters will get disqualified (again).

Vy 73.

Martin, LU5DX
_______________________________________________
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

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