"which off-air method of communication the team is suspected of using"
hmmm...
I would arrange a few CW frequencies and ask my friend back in the states
or Canada to monitor them 24x7.
Once in a while I will transmit a request for "spot me, the rate is slow"
and will notify him about upcoming band change.
All of this can be done in a form of innocent cq or fake qso with bogus
call sign...
N0ONE de CO0LID... my radio is 14 years old, my power is 220 W
that's it - you just told you friend to spot you at 14.220 :)
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:53 AM, ve4xt@mymts.net <ve4xt@mymts.net> wrote:
> If there is, as apparently there is, evidence of multiple incursions by US
> stations into forbidden band segments, in violation of US law, why zero DQs?
>
> Why isn't the law-and-order contingent clamouring for justice? If the
> message is "break the rules and you'll be DQd," isn't US federal law a
> significant rule Americans should be expected to obey?
>
> Especially since many, it seems, persisted in completing the Q after
> having been warned they were out of band. I can see if a station does it
> once, and isn't warned. Hard to claim brain cramp if it's repeated, or is
> done after a warning.
>
> Is it not possible foreign hams who were DQd for less would see that as
> bias?
>
> Ed does point out significant inconsistency in the DQ of T48K. I am
> curious, in light of Ed's claim that cellphone bills were provided as
> evidence to the contrary, which off-air method of communication the team is
> suspected of using.
>
> If the committee is going to observe a lower standard of proof, shouldn't
> that also apply to exculpatory evidence?
>
> 73, kelly, ve4xt
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On Apr 18, 2017, at 19:25, Ed K1EP <k1ep.list@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 4:36 PM, <w5ov@w5ov.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> OK. That's enough.
> >>
> >> There was apparent evidence of off-air communication with VE3XIN and
> T48K
> >> in approximately 60 suspicious spots of T48K.
> >
> > Off air? ESP? Just how did this happen? We were on an island in a
> > somewhat remote area with NO phone, NO internet, NO WiFi. If you had a
> > satellite phone, you would be put in prison. We submitted our cell phone
> > bills with detail billing information for the weekend with no evidence of
> > this. But Bob claims apparent evidence. Show us the evidence Bob. Bob
> > wants us to prove the negative.
> >
> >
> >> To confirm this and other claims of innocence, SDR recordings of T48K
> were
> >> evaluated.
> >
> > So off the air is now on the air.
> >
> >
> >
> >> During this review, several instances of T48K requesting to be spotted
> >> over the air, directly in violation of the rules were noted.
> >
> > There were three instances of a new contester asking for spots on his
> > first shift in the contest. We told him to not do it, he stopped, that
> was
> > it. So if you break your rule, intentional or not, you are DQ? How
> about
> > all the US stations we worked out of the US band? Clear evidence in our
> > log of the frequency. Not one US station was DQd.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> At that point, no further investigation was necessary and the
> >> Disqualification confirmed.
> >>
> >> Those are the key facts of the T48K DQ.
> >
> > Those are not all the facts and you know it. You are trying to justify
> a
> > bad judgment call.
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> There were no hunches, feelings or other unsubstantiated reasons for the
> >> T48K DQ.
> >
> > You clearly state "apparent". That is a hunch.
> >
> >
> >> No "friends" spotted anyone a few times leading to a DQ.
> >>
> >> 73,
> >> Bob W5OV
> >> CQWW Contest Committee
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Mon, April 17, 2017 1:34 pm, Ed K1EP wrote:
> >>> On Apr 17, 2017 2:11 PM, "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> It is indeed time for some rules changes. You cannot be DQing people
> for
> >>> the actions of others that we have no control over. If you have proof
> >>> of collusion or cooperation great. To tell me you can DQ me because my
> >>> neighbor thought he was doing something nice and spotted me a few times
> >>> is over the top.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Well that is exactly what KR2Q is telling you and what he has done. He
> >>> will DQ a station because others have spotted him without that
> station's
> >>> knowledge or consent and the station has no control over or
> communication
> >>> with the spotter.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
|