[CQ-Contest] Dinged Good QSOs

[Tom Osborne]

Mike wrote:
> 
> The 3 qso penalty really just changes the weighting in the >tradeoff between logging your best guess and then moving on to >the next guy

One thing I saw asked once and never saw an answer was "What 3
Q's are removed?"  Are they actual Q's or Q points? The next 3? 
What if one of the ones removed is a double mult?  Just curious. 
73 
Tom W7WHY


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


>From Ben Coleman" <oloryn at benshome.net  Sat Aug  4 09:39:25 2001
From: Ben Coleman" <oloryn at benshome.net (Ben Coleman)
Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2001 03:39:25 -0500
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Dinged Good QSOs
Message-ID: <20010804073925.88F936058 at erebor.benshome.net>


On Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:48:20 -0400, Tom Rauch wrote:

>> Look guys, rather than try to apply inappropriate analogies, can anyone
>> think of any other sport where the competitors rely on SUCCESSFUL
>> interactions in order to play the game?
>
>Dating.

And how many wish you could get a mere 3-statement penalty for
miscommunications in *that* game (not to mention the sequels)?

Ben
-- 
Ben Coleman oloryn at benshome.net      | The attempt to legislatively
http://oloryn.home.mindspring.com/   | micromanage equality results, at
Amateur Radio NJ8J                   | best, in equal misery for all.


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