[CQ-Contest] CX2DK CQWW checklog

[DXer]

And this alone - not providing a recording for the second consecutive 
year - settles the issue.

Once again, it was not/not a DQ. We don't know, and will likely never 
know, if there was a violation.

It was a case of non-compliance with post-contest rules. The log was 
reclassified as a checklog for this reason, and this reason only.

We can argue whether the CC was too lenient the first year, but as Peter 
said, if the rules are not enforced, why bother having rules.

73 de Vince, VA3VF

On 2017-03-06 1:31 AM, Peter Bowyer wrote:
> And that was likely the reason no action was taken the first year this
> station failed to produce a recording.
>
> The second year running, though, he had a year to plan how to comply with
> the rule and failed to do so, it was time to act.
>
> If you have a rule that's there to provide a way for a top station to
> demonstrate they are in compliance, and 2 years running the same top
> station breaks that rule, you have to start enforcement otherwise you may
> as well not bother.
>
> Peter G4MJS
>
> On 6 Mar 2017 12:10 a.m., "VE3FH via CQ-Contest" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Give me a break!!
>>
>> There's tons of reasons why anyone could do much better than expected and
>> end up placing much higher in the results, if by chance someone ends up
>> within the top three and made no recording thinking there was no chance for
>> that to happen then that competitor is rewarded with being tossed in the
>> checklog pot and accused of wrongdoing... What a joke!!
>>
>> 73,
>> Julio VE3FH