[CQ-Contest] CQWW defined "single op"

[Paul J. Piercey]

Yep, so they should just call it one or the other consistently and be done
with it.


73 -- Paul VO1HE 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Turner [mailto:dezrat at copper.net]
> Sent: November 29, 2006 01:11
> To: vo1he at rac.ca
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW defined "single op"
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 19:45:57 -0000, "Paul J. Piercey"
>  <p.piercey at nl.rogers.com> wrote:
>
> >OK, so here's my beef. If that's so cut and dried, why does
> one contest
> >sponsor declare that a single op using spotting networks is
> assisted in
> >one contest while, in another, calls the same thing a "multi-op"?
>
> ------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------
>
> In a sense, both are the same thing with different names. One
> has the other ops in your shack, the other has them in other
> shacks, but the point is you are being assisted either way.
>
> Granted, the ones in your shack can do other things in
> addition to spotting, but you get the general idea. Help is help.
>
> Bill, W6WRT
>