I would like to mention that W5WMU is a very good guy.
Not only is Pat an experienced and revered contester...he is also one of the
most hospitable guys you could imagine. When I went on a trip to downeast Maine
he offered me use of his qth even though he and his wife were out of town. And
we had never even met in person.
That his intended experiment was announced prior to the contest is total
transparency. Nothing wrong with experimentation. Thats what our hobby is all
about.
Best regards,
Scott W3TX
On Jan 8, 2016, at 4:33 PM, David Siddall <hhamwv@gmail.com> wrote:
This has become a very strange thread indeed. The NAQP rules specifically
recognize the possibility that some stations may run more than 100 watts
and provide that logs of such stations will be check logs. (Rule # 15.)
Even if it wasn't in the rules, the FCC, not NAQP, determines power
limits. NAQP only determines power limits for competitors, not others who
may make QSOs but aren't competing.
In this case, someone announced that tests were going to be run with full
power during the time of NAQP and that the log would be submitted as a
check log. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, and indeed, the
email telling us should be commended as it prevents questions arising
during or after the competition.
Mellow out, guys, he's not competing with you. He *IS* giving you contacts
and points. You should thank him for that.
73, Dave K3ZJ
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> For the guys in the top-10 ("the guys that win all the time"), you would
> lose that bet.
>
> Thanks to the RBN, it is very easy to identify "curiously strong"
> stations. In past NAQP's, a number of those stations have seen their scores
> mysteriously disappear in the final results.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
>
>> On 01/08/2016 08:35 AM, Bob Poortinga wrote:
>>
>> Jeff Clarke <ku8e@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>> The guys that win all the time typically run HP in other contests anyway.
>>
>> And I'll bet that some of them run HP in NAQP, either willfully or due
>> to ignorance of the rules.
>>
>> Bob NG9M
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|