CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] R: Re: R: 3V8SS disqualified from WW SSB and WRTC

To: Gerry Hull <gerry@yccc.org>, Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] R: Re: R: 3V8SS disqualified from WW SSB and WRTC
From: <w5prchuck@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:38:01 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
KG5UOE is not in the FCC database.

Chuck W5PR

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Gerry Hull
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 11:56 AM
To: Kelly Taylor
Cc: cq-contest; Ashraf Chaabane
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] R: Re: R: 3V8SS disqualified from WW SSB and WRTC

I just read Ash's post on his web page.

I wish Dave, K1TTT, still did his analysis of IP traffic.

However, with some checking on www.arin.net:

Committee says IP of 3V8CB and KG5UOE was 197.2.86.149.   F4HJD and these
same two cal lsigns also spotted from 197.0.251.101.
Ash says his IP was 196.176.13.62.

ALL of these IP addresses are from the same provider:

Name Generic POC
Handle GENER11-ARIN
Company AfriNIC Ltd
Street Level 11ABC
Raffles Tower
Lot 19, Cybercity
City Ebene
I doubt KG5UOE and F4HJD would be routing their traffic via this internet
supplier for Africa/Indian Ocean.

Also, said he was using a 3G/4G cellular provider.    None of these
providers have mobile devices having a fixed IP.
It is most certainly dynamic, assigned from a pool.

Is this smoking-gun evidence?   I don't know.  I'll leave that up to the
reader.   The shame is that Ash is a great op.

However, we must have confidence in the committee (both CQWW and WRTC).

73, Gerry W1VE

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net> wrote:

> I think this is definitely a case for the ideal ‘Justice must not only be
> done, it must be seen to be done.’
>
> With all due respect to the committee, from the information available, we
> cannot see justice being done here.
>
> It is true we do not, now, know whether we are seeing everything or only
> the things Ash wants us to see, but from what we CAN see, it looks as
> though the DQ is based on flimsy grounds. Given the added consequence of
> the DQ (WRTC eligibility), it demands the highest standard of proof of
> guilt.
>
> I have my doubts a guilty party would protest to this degree. I suggest
> the committee members owe it to themselves to be transparent on this one.
>
> 73, kelly, ve4xt
>
>
> > On Feb 22, 2017, at 7:34 AM, Ashraf Chaabane <ash.kf5eyy@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Mike, Ria and all,
> >
> > I put online the CC accusations (their native emails) and my responses:
> >
> > http://www.kf5eyy.info/3V8SS_WWSSB16_DQ.htm
> >
> > I think that allows everyone to read from both sides. Now it's up to you
> to
> > comment!
> >
> > 73
> > --
> > Ash ~ 3V8SS/KF5EYY
> > http://www.kf5eyy.info/
> > Phone/SMS: (+216) 22670026
> > Skype: kf5eyy
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>