[CQ-Contest] DC and NAQP

Ron Notarius W3WN wn3vaw at verizon.net
Fri Aug 10 21:01:14 PDT 2012

Oh, we could have a lot of fun with the semantics.  After all, technically,
isn't Puerto Rico a Commonwealth as well?

However... VA, MA, KY & PA are political entities that have been admitted to
the Union.  So from that standpoint, they are States for the purposes of
determining what is and is not a multiplier.  

And as a practical matter, there is no difference between the State of PA &
the Commonwealth of PA.  The State/Commonwealth government uses the two
terms interchangeably.

Now, I don't have a problem with DC being it's own mult.  I'd simply ask
that IF it is determined by the appropriate folks, with the appropriate
input from the reflector & other sources, the rule modifications make it
clear as to WHY DC is going to be a mult, but other populated US territories
that are not States are not.

Otherwise, one could make a case for PR & VI, as populated US territories
within the generally accepted bounds of North America, should also be mults.
Is that what you want?  Or would that be an unanticipated consequence?

73, ron w3wn

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Embry
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 8:59 PM
To: George Fremin III
Cc: Mike Tessmer; cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] DC and NAQP


If this is indeed the case, then perhaps Virginia, Massachusetts, Kentucky,
and Pennsylvania, while politically different are technically Commonwealths
and not States.

While I will admit that DC is not a state, but Constitutionally a 'Federal
City' is is a separate political entity.  Personally, I can see no reason
why DC should not be its own mult.  But, one wants to play semantics with
words and definitions, then remove the Commonwealths as multipliers.



On Friday, August 10, 2012, George Fremin III wrote:

> The mults in NAQP are US states, Canadian provinces and north American
> countries.
> DC is not a state.
> The rules do mention DC and say that it counts as MD for this contest.
> --
> George Fremin III
> On Aug 10, 2012, at 3:24 PM, Mike Tessmer
<mtessmer at mindspring.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > With this talk about new sections/multipliers, I think what NN3W may
> have hinted at is:
> >
> > Why is DC not a multiplier in the NAQP?
> >
> > I asked this same question a few years ago and got exactly one answer
> that implied that adding DC might render all NAQP records meaningless, or
> something to that effect.  That's a very weak argument in that having
> someone show up from DC would have no more effect on any record than
> someone show up from Greenland or any Caribbean or Central American
> country.  (Yet we'd all be saying "Great to see some DX activity!"}
> >
> > So I'll toss it out there again:
> >
> > - Why not add DC as a mult in NAQP?
> > - What would be a valid reason not to?
> >
> > Perhaps one of the NAQP managers might chime in.
> >
> >
> > 73, Mike K9NW
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com <javascript:;>
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <javascript:;>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

Jeff Embry, K3OQ
ARCI #11643, FPQRP #-696,
QRP-L # 67, NAQCC #25, ARS #1733

Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of
enthusiasm.  - Sir Winston Churchill
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list