[CQ-Contest] Business as usual.....

k8cc k8cc at mediaone.net
Tue Oct 31 22:00:39 EST 2000

At 08:53 AM 10/31/00 -0500, Henry Heidtmann wrote:
>         I have to agree with Scott. This is nonsense. If you are not 
> working a mult, as a M/S, you are in clear violation of the rule. I would 
> consider this type of transmission by a mult station "operating outside 
> the limits of your category for the duration of the contest."
>         I think a similar situation came up several years ago when a qrp 
> op would call CQ, get a station to hear him, then cut the power down to 
> make the qrp qso.
>         This will turn a M/S into a 2 radio cq machine. Why not just make 
> it like ARRL with the m/2 category? Because its CQWW.

I am not a lawyer, but if you read the rules the second station is to be 
used to only "work" new multipliers.  This is the way the CQWW committee 
has chosen to define the category - the CQWW rules do not say "only one 
transmitted signal" like the ARRL contest rules say for multi-single, so 
"CQing for mults" is not against the rules.

By the same logic however, working non-mult QSOs on the mult station would 
appear to be clearly against the rules, even if the QSOs are of no benefit 
to the score (i.e., are set to zero).

Therefore, it appears that you can CQ for mults, but must turn away any 
non-multiplier QSO.  IMHO, this is unsportsmanlike behavior.


CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list