[CQ-Contest] Comments on CQWW Rules

W0MU Mike Fatchett w0mu at w0mu.com
Tue Jun 24 10:47:17 EDT 2014

The aim is gain two way contacts?    I thought it was to work as many 
people as possible and as many mults.  Pileup control is done by giving 
callsigns.  So in an effort to placate the I NEED IT NOW  society a 
rules change has been made to remove a viable strategy from a run 
station so that S&P stations can get a call or verify a call faster.

The next rule change we need is that everyone gets a shiny trophy and we 
have no winners and losers..................

Mike W0MU

On 6/23/2014 10:25 PM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> AF6O wrote:
> >Once you try to force a competitor to adopt a strategy to boost his 
> competitors score it ceases to be a contest.
> With the aim of the contest being to gain as much TWO-WAY-contacts, 
> the other half of a qso seems to be such an essential part(ner) of the 
> action that the decision does not seem to be unwise. Oh, and it is 
> simply fair to take care of that point. But YMMV
> Chris DL8MBS
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list