[CQ-Contest] Bravo - CQ

W0MU w0mu at w0mu.com
Thu Jun 25 16:33:34 EDT 2015


I am concerned with exactly what would be necessary to gain a lifetime 
ban.  What he did was so far over the line.

Too bad too as he seemed like a very decent op.

Shame on you sir and all the others that have yet to be caught.  You 
days in the spotlight will also be limited and this cheating hurts us all.


On 6/25/2015 8:20 AM, Ed Sawyer wrote:
> Bravo to the CQ Contest Committee and the Directors of the CQ WW, CQ WPX,
> and CQ 160 contests.  I hope the crowd sharing method that invoked the TO7A
> suspicion will continue if any other logs appear that need to be sanitized.
> It didn't take long for the contest community to confirm what smelled was
> indeed bad fish.
> Just as an FYI, I have already set up my recording software using Audacity.
> In my case - I found that separate isolation transformers were need on each
> channel L/R to make it noise and "click free" as I changed radios.  I will
> be recording the IARU contest as a "trial run".  It would look to be "no
> burden at all" to do so.
> One thing that needs still to be clarified in the changing monitoring rules
> of recording and frequency logging: what is the frequency of split operation
> on 40 and 80.  In my case, I often transmit on one radio and listen on the
> other.  My receive frequency would never be recorded in such case.  Also, in
> looking at my logs and others, it looks pretty random whether the receive or
> the transmit frequency ends up in the log when using single radio split.  It
> probably depends on the software and which VFO is the transmit vs the
> receive.  The intent needs to be clarified here and the less intrusive the
> better to allow for software, radio, and technique flexibility.
> 73
> Ed  N1UR
> _______________________________________________
> 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