[CQ-Contest] Remote operation by out of staters in state QSO parties

Dave Edmonds dave at pkministrywebs.com
Fri Oct 16 19:38:13 EDT 2020

 Fellow contesters,

The State QSO Party group will be evaluating the 2020 SQP Challenge awards
program during the next 4-6 weeks, as part of our planning process for the
2021 QP season. Our team of experienced contesters (K4SBZ, WB9CIF, N8II,
W1WBB, K8ZT and  WN4AFP) will be discussing Remote operation and many other
contesting topics that relate to the SQP Challenge awards program during
this process. We will announce the 2021 SQP Challenge awards program rules
no later than January 1, 2021.

We have learned much from our successes and shortcomings so far in 2020. We
will build upon this knowledge as we strive to offer an even more exciting
SQP Challenge experience in 2021.

Dave Edmonds, WN4AFP
Chairman, State QSO Party Group

On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 1:47 PM ku8e <ku8e at ku8e.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure why they make such a big deal about this. I contacted WN4AFP
> about a score of mine that was missing and found out they just pull claimed
> scores from 3830. So basically I could submit a fake score to 3830 and they
> would count it.As the Georgia QSO Party manager I would never disallow any
> type of entry whether it's remote or not. Those of us who run successful
> QSO Parties all know it's all about keeping it interesting for those out of
> state. That means lots of stations to work and as many rovers as possible
> to keep activity high.Jeff KU8E Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy
> smartphone
> -------- Original message --------From: K3TN via CQ-Contest <
> cq-contest at contesting.com> Date: 10/5/20  8:04 AM  (GMT-05:00) To:
> cq-contest at contesting.com Subject: [CQ-Contest] Remote operation by out
> of staters in state QSO parties This issue came up in the WV QSO party a
> few years ago, when the rules were changed to prohibit remote operation of
> in-state stations. A number of hams  who operate remotely, and some who
> have houses and stations in WV but don't live their year round, weighed in
> and convinced the rulemakers to allow remote operation. This is a much more
> common scenario in FL and I suppose these days ME, with all the remote
> stations that have gone up in ME.To me, there are two issues: (1) at the
> state QSO party level, is there a problem with in-state stations being
> remotely opped; and (2) at the state QSO party challenge, should the
> cumulative scoring differentiate between in-state points earned by an
> in-state op vs. in-state points earned by an out of state op.Personally, as
> someone who has frequently operated remotely, at the QSO party level if
> remote operating helps more in-state station be on the air during state QSO
> parties, I'm for allowing it. At the QSO party challenge level, unless all
> state QPs go the same way, the QSO challenge would have to do something if
> it wanted to level the field. Personally, I don't really care about the
> points in the SQP Challenge, but since the 3830 reporting already supports
> remote operation, it would be easy enough to differentiate the points in a
> standard way at that level.73 John
> K3TN_______________________________________________CQ-Contest mailing
> listCQ-Contest at contesting.comhttp://
> lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> 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