[CQ-Contest] Revised 2011 NAQP Rules - while we're at it....

[Richard F DiDonna NN3W]

No, its not a state, but as I mentioned before, several contests recognize 
the District as a distinct entity - worthy of a multiplier.  ARRL DX, CQ 
160, ARRL 10, etc., all list DC as a multiplier.  So, clearly simply the 
rule of "states" is modified to reflect the unique status of DC.

Again, you're example is not relevant - in the least bit.

73 Rich NN3W

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jack Brindle" <jackbrindle at me.com>
To: "George Fremin III" <geoiii at kkn.net>
Cc: "cq-contest" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 25, 2010 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Revised 2011 NAQP Rules - while we're at it....


> That is kind of the point. Washington, DC is not a state either. Let's 
> leave well enough alone.
>
> Jack Brindle, W6FB
>
>
> On Dec 24, 2010, at 3:42 PM, George Fremin III wrote:
>
>> The mults for the naqp are states.  I don't think Campbell, CA is a 
>> separate state from CA.
>>
>> --
>> George Fremin III
>>
>>
>> On Dec 24, 2010, at 5:04 PM, Jack Brindle <jackbrindle at me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> And make Campbell, CA a mult also. I'd really like to be on the "chased" 
>>> side of things for a change...
>>>
>>> Jack Brindle, W6FB
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 24, 2010, at 10:38 AM, Richard F DiDonna NN3W wrote:
>>>
>>>> Good choice.  While we're at it, how about adding Washington, D.C. as a
>>>> multiplier?
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest