[CQ-Contest] SS CW question

Wed Nov 10 13:47:11 PST 2010

How would anyone ever research that I was WN2ICU, and got my first license in 1968 ?

Please, can you folks please get a life and do something productive - like 
prepare your stations for Phone SS and CQWW CW ?

73,
Steve, N2IC

On 11/10/2010 02:04 PM, Joe wrote:
>
> On 11/10/2010 1:24 PM, Kelly Taylor wrote:
>> Here is what it would take before anybody could even remotely consider an
>> inaccurate check a rules violation: we'd need a volunteer to stand up and
>> say, 'Yes, I will do a painstaking search of all global licence databases,
>> comparing not only callsigns and names but cross-referencing similar names
>> and addresses for every one of the 1,500 operators who enter SS every year
>> (not to mention those that play but do not enter).'
> no just the first place winners.
>
> K9ABC looks like he is in first place.  but his CK is wrong he sent 55
> when it 82,  too bad,  who's in second place/  W9xyz  he sent 37 and it
> is correct.  he wins first place.
>
> Only would need to check the CK till a first place is made.  not too bad
> at all.
>> 73, kelly
>> ve4xt
>>
>> Ps: I'm with Vlad on the issue of remembering.
>>
>> On 11/10/10 12:02 PM, "Vladimir Sidorov"<vs_otw at rogers.com>   wrote:
>>
>>> This topic, as well as some others, would never come up again if contest
>>> sponsors themselves would simply follow up rules. What we actually have by
>>> now?
>>>
>>> - SS. The year of the first license as a part of the exchange is clearly put
>>> into the rules. But the sponsors say, well, the requirement is like this but
>>> you can use any other figure you like...
>>>
>>> - CQ WW. The exchange includes a zone. But there are comments from the log
>>> checkers, you know what, the zone is not checked during logs'
>>> verification...
>>>
>>> Log checkers, contest sponsors should realize that any statement like that
>>> can not only confuse people. It is also a clear provocation for them to
>>> think, OK, if this requirement is not that strict, what other rules'
>>> violations would  also be OK?
>>>
>>> A rule is a rule. Period. Any question about contests' rules should be
>>> answered clearly, please go ahead and read the rules. In our particular
>>> cases, send your license's year and your zone. No tolerance.
>>>
>>> And just a remark, from the bottom of my heart, I cannot believe that people
>>> don't remember the year of their first license...
>>>
>>> 73,
>>> Vladimir VE3IAE
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> May I respectfully suggest checking the archives on this one?
>>>>
>>>> Zack is right: even as quoted by Nate, the rule doesn't even specify
>>>> amateur
>>>> licence.
>>>>
>>>> However, if you check the archives, the ruling from the ARRL has been
>>>> consistent: as long as your exchange remains stable throughout the contest
>>>> period, it doesn't matter if you use the first year YOU were licensed, the
>>>> first year your host was licensed or the year you lost your virginity.
>>>>
>>>> With callsign lapses, hiatuses from the hobby, moving and any number of
>>>> reasons, the ARRL simply has no way of knowing when each of the 1500 or so
>>>> ops every year were first licensed, nor do they have any incentive or
>>>> reason
>>>> to audit every 'check' for accuracy (other than that received exchanges
>>>> match sent exchanges).
>>>>
>>>> Use what makes sense for you. When I have guest opped and used the host's
>>>> call, I've used the check he's used in the past. (Cuts down on fill
>>>> requests
>>>> from stations using a database.) I use my own check at home. (Again, cuts
>>>> down on fill requests.)
>>>>
>>>> The ARRL has even gone so far as to say if you wish to pick two random
>>>> numbers (does anyone really think that EVERYONE sending the cute and very
>>>> easily read '73' was actually licensed in 1973?), go right ahead.
>>>>
>>>> This really is another one of those topics that comes up EVERY SINGLE
>>>> YEAR,
>>>> isn't it?
>>>>
>>>> 73, kelly
>>>> ve4xt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/9/10 4:57 AM, "Nate Bargmann"<n0nb at n0nb.us>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> * On 2010 08 Nov 20:37 -0600, Zack Widup wrote:
>>>>>> The rules don't specify for the check the year you were first licensed
>>>>>> as a
>>>>>> WHAT. I suppose I could legally use the year I was first licensed as a
>>>>>> Novice, as a General, as an Extra, or maybe even the year I was first
>>>>>> licensed as W9SZ. They are all different.
>>>>> As I read the rule:
>>>>>
>>>>> 4.4.1. The last 2 digits of the year of first license for either the
>>>>> operator or the station.
>>>>>
>>>>> it seems rather clear to me that if I am operating my own station then
>>>>> it is the year I was first licensed and that is what I've used each time
>>>>> I've operated solo or used my call in a multi effort.
>>>>>
>>>>> If I were operating the club station, that could get a bit more sticky,
>>>>> do I choose the year our club first obtained a club license (somewhat
>>>>> recently) or the year the SK's call we now hold was first licensed (mid
>>>>> 1920's)?  I know which I would choose.
>>>>>
>>>>>> But I've been sticking with the same year for a long time. It's
>>>>>> engrained
>>>>>> into me so I just automatically send it now.
>>>>> I think it's most important that it not change throughout the period of
>>>>> SS.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73, de Nate>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>