[CQ-Contest] Claiming assistance when not actually assisted

[David Gilbert]

I can't be both a boy and a girl at the same time.  Something can't be 
both sweet and sour at the same time.  East and west never meet.

But I CAN qualify equally for assisted and non-assisted by doing EXACTLY 
the same thing per the rules in either case.  If I can legally choose to 
enter either category without doing anything different, why can't I 
qualify for both?   Calling that ludicrous seems ludicrous to me.

Dave   AB7E



On 12/4/2015 2:50 PM, Radio K0HB wrote:
> While we're at it we could eliminate the distinction between boys and girls, the distinction between sweet and sour, and the distinction between east and west.
>
>
> No, wait a minute those things are different from each other.  Combining them is a ludicrous notion.
>
>
>
>
>
> Well, so are assisted and not-assisted different from each other, and combining them in a single category is a ludicrous notion also.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __73, de Hans, K0HB
>
> "Just a Boy and His Radio"™
>
>
>
>
> On Friday, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:53, Tim Shoppa <tshoppa at gmail.com>, wrote:
>
> At this point I might start asking why not eliminate the distinction
>
> between assisted and unassisted, and allow assistance for everyone?
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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