[CQ-Contest] Counting DC as a Multiplier and Not as PartofMaryland.

Richard DiDonna NN3W nn3w at cox.net
Wed May 23 07:17:37 EDT 2007

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv at subich.com>
To: "'Richard DiDonna NN3W'" <nn3w at cox.net>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:36 PM
Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Counting DC as a Multiplier and Not as 

> NN3W writes:
>> The differences are pretty definitive, and D.C. holds a
>> unique position worthy of multiplier recognition.
> I do not agree that DC holds a unique position worthy of
> recognition as a multiplier.  The multipliers in NAQP are
> DXCC entities plus US States and Canadian provinces.  DC
> does not qualify on any of those criteria.
Fine, settled.  In the upcoming NAQPs and Sprints, no station from the 
District of Columbia is allowed to compete, as it is neither a U.S.state nor 
a DXCC entity nor a multiplier.  Is that acceptable to you?   Does that seem 

> DC is considered part of Maryland for the WAS program and
> is also counted as Maryland (MDC section, specifically) for
> SS.
And DC is considered as a separate multiplier in other ARRL sponsored 
contests (i.e., ARRL DX, ARRL 10). So, what is arbitrary in one sphere, is 
not so in others.  A two word change will do nothing to denegrate the 
operation of the contest.  To the contary, as most people here agree, it 
will indeed likely enhance it.

>> > This is no more a "wrong" than the arbitrary multipliers in many
>> > other contests.  It is a historical fact of life that should be
>> > maintained for tradition and not changed on a whim.
>> >
>> I'm not sure how its being changed on a whim.  Its as much of
>> a political entity as any state (albeit without a governor).
>> Indeed most major contests recognize it as a multiplier -
>> ARRL DX, ARRL 10, CQWW 160, RTTY Roundup  and several QSO
>> parties including Florida (recently announced).
> The proposal is to change it at the whim of, and to benefit a
> limited number of, stations in DC.  As a matter of principle,
> I always object to creating arbitrary multipliers in any contest
> particularly when that multiplier does not fit the established
> criteria for multipliers.
No, the benefit is available to all - increased activities, and increased 
multipliers.  Just for historical perspective, did you object to the 
splitting up of the Canadian Maritimes for purposes of NAQP?

73 Rich NN3W

> 73,
>   ... Joe, W4TV

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list