[CQ-Contest] Frustration this weekend....

[Pete Smith]

Seems to me that's right.  Moreover, if you SET/NODX (or the equivalent) 
on the Cluster node, there will be an independent record to prove that 
while you were spotting, you were not *receiving* spots.

73, Pete N4ZR

The World Contest Station Database, updated daily at www.conteststations.com
The Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com,
spots at telnet.reversebeacon.net, port 7000


On 12/1/2010 10:09 PM, Barry wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's OK for a single-op
> (unassisted) to post spots, but not receive them.  IIRC, CT has this
> functionality built in.
> Barry W2UP
>
> On 12/1/2010 7:30 AM, Jimk8mr at aol.com wrote:
>> If the unscrupulous person was a single op (not assisted) he would have to
>> be doubly unscrupulous to have an open packet/internet connection available
>>    to spot the guy.
>>
>> If the person was assisted (single op or multi) it would be a sign of
>> scrupulousness that he wanted to verify the callsign from the sending  station,
>> not from third party spotting information.
>>
>> 73  -  Jim   K8MR
>>
>>