CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP (A) class

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP (A) class
From: Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2014 16:18:13 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I agree with your advocacy of an assisted class, Bill, but it's not just Skimmers. Any spottingproduces the same phenomenon. I suspect that many people get on during NAQP and use spots, not because they are cheating but because they use the occasion to finish multi-band WAS awards. In the past, I have run power in NAQP and submitted Checklogs, simply lookingfor "rate fun."

Also, making spots per se is not illegal - you could turn on the "Spot all S&P QSOs" function in N1MM Logger, and so long as you "SEt NOdx" at the cluster, it is perfectly legal, because you are *receiving* no assistance.

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
http://reversebeacon.net,
blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
For spots, please go to your favorite
ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.

On 1/12/2014 1:02 PM, ko7ss@yahoo.com wrote:
IMHO, there really should be an (A) class in NAQP! Skimmers are being used, 
many times
yesterday I had groups of 3-5 stations call in absolutely zero-beat. What's the 
point in making
(A) stations enter as M/2? Why would they bother sending in a log?

73, Bill KO7AA
_______________________________________________
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>