CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Working Split In A Contest Is Verboten!

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Working Split In A Contest Is Verboten!
From: "WW3S" <ww3s@zoominternet.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 18:59:43 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
well, if they dont submit a log, the qso’s shouldnt be removed.....they are not 
a unique, since many worked them, be interesting to see how it gets handled....

> On 2/22/2016 2:56:31 PM, Tom Hammond (thammond@chartermi.net) wrote:
> > Well, I admit that I fell prey to this, twice! www.qrz.com/db/gj0ke comes up
> blank. Geesh...
> 
> I worked "them" on 15M at 18:04 and on 20M at 20:59. That means that "they"
> were operating for at least 3 hours handing out bogus points. Who would do
> such a thing? Why? 
> 
> I passed through Jersey on a business trip once, and working them reminded
> me of it. I wondered to myself why Jersey could run a KW while the rest of
> the UK can only run 400W. I was had, but good. 
> 
> I wonder if I would have caught ID0IOT or DU0PE (both poor examples, I
> admit) in my oblivious state. 
> 
> I'm feeling seriously disappointed by my fraternal brethren, and in myself a
> bit. 
> 
> Tom
> K8BKM
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ron
> Notarius W3WN
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 12:03 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Working Split In A Contest Is Verboten!
> 
> Speaking of things that are "verboten" in a contest (or should be)...
> 
> 
> Under the category of WFWL, anyone else raise an eyebrow over "GJ0KE" ?  I
> caught him (or whomever it was using that call) on 15 CW on Saturday.  The
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>