[CQ-Contest] ] Incorrect conclusions about unassisted versus

[ve4xt at mts.net]

I'd turn off the radio and go play with my kids.

When I came back to deal with my log, I'd have a better understanding of 
that which is truly important and that which is not.

73,kelly
ve4xt



> From: Zack Widup <w9sz at prairienet.org>
> Date: 2006/12/21 Thu PM 01:35:11 CST
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ] Incorrect conclusions about unassisted	
versus
>  assisted
> 
> 
> Maybe because you couldn't know with complete certainty in most cases 
> unless you were actually there at the station, and if you turn out to be 
> wrong, you could be getting yourself in a lot of trouble.
> 
> Here's a question on another topic:  What would you do if you heard a 
> station make, say, three more QSO's after your clock indicates the 
contest 
> is over, and the station finally quits when someone says to him "Contest 
> is up!" ?
> 
> 73, Zack W9SZ
> 
> 
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006, Ken Widelitz wrote:
> 
> > If cheating is so rampant, and certain operators KNOW who is 
cheating, why does no one EVER specify callsigns when stating cheating 
is rampant???
> > 
> > 73, Ken, K6LA / VY2TT
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>