[CQ-Contest] CX2DK CQWW checklog

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

Wrong.

A DQ carries with it other penalties.

I suggest that you read the entire set of rules.

Follow the rules.  What is so difficult about that?

W0MU


On 3/4/2017 8:11 AM, Ria Jairam wrote:
> Oh it's not really a difference.
>
> It's like asking someone for their resignation versus firing them. Same
> thing happens - the person is gone. The only difference is one looks better
> on paper for future endeavors.
>
> So for all intents and purposes it's a DQ, just not in name. The CC is
> being lenient. I'm sure they could DQ if they really wanted to. They've
> done this for others.
>
>
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 10:01 AM DXer <hfdxmonitor at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Rudy and group,
>>
>> Serious question...it has to do with terminolgy. Is this really a DQ?
>> W4PA's message to CX2DK does not use the term DQ, but reclassification.
>>
>> As you wrote below, there was no violation, but a non-compliance situation.
>>
>> Not taking sides, but DQ seems to strong for what happened.
>>
>> 73 de Vince, VA3VF
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2017-03-03 7:17 PM, Rudy Bakalov via CQ-Contest wrote:
>>> Not knowing the full details, however, it seems that the station has
>> been DQ'd solely due to the lack of audio recording. That is, no other rule
>> violation or suspected violation was mentioned. So if indeed the log
>> checker did not have any other concerns and the lack of recording was the
>> only reason, the DQ seems a bit excessive.
>>> Rudy N2WQ
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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