| To: | "KR6X Leigh S. Jones" <kr6x@kr6x.com>, cq-contest@contesting.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer |
| From: | "K0HB " <k-zero-hb@earthlink.net> |
| Reply-to: | k-zero-hb@earthlink.net |
| Date: | Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:57:07 -0000 |
| List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
>
> To the degree that this is true, so might a receiver; it's only necessary
> that the receiver output be stored. yet no one is seriously suggesting
> that a receiver should be disallowed.
>
Neither is anyone suggesting that Skimmer be disallowed.
The suggestion is that single ops should not have to compete with
skimmer-equipped stations.
73, de Hans, K0HB
Just a boy and his radio.
--
><{{{{*> http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|
| Previous by Date: | [CQ-Contest] FQP Mobile Window, John Laney |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] SKIMMER = BUMMER, Paul O'Kane |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer, Tom Osborne |
| Next by Thread: | [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer, Ken Claerbout |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |