[CQ-Contest] ARRL DX CW Results - Did Anyone Else Notice?

[Ron Notarius W3WN]

 Implications not withstanding, is there any actual proof that KO1A/IZ3EYZ deliberately intended to violate the rules?
For that matter, implications not withstanding, is there any actual proof that KO1A/IZ3EYZ operated improperly if not illegally?
And for that matter, has anyone actually discussed this (off reflector) with KO1A/IZ3EYZ prior to this being posted?  
I do not condone illegal operating.  That said, I am not comfortable with allegations if not accusations being made without giving the other party an opportunity to respond.  There may well be extenuating circumstances that were not in the original email, that others may not have been aware of, which may easily explain the alleged discrepancies.
There are also no indications that this matter was raised to the contest committee prior to the email being sent.  Is it not possible that the committee was already aware of the potential issue and had resolved it?  And if nothing improper actually occurred, is it any of our business?  Do we really have to hear, and argue about, dirty laundry that is all basically gossip?
And on that note...
There have been at least 2 or 3 occasions over the years where someone has made allegations about a contester's operating on this reflector, or other reflectors & social media, which have resulted in good operators walking away, whether they should have or not.  The Court of Public Opinion is all too easily swayed by implications and allegations that often turn out to be mis-interpretations if not outright falsehoods.  Should we not be sure of the facts before making public accusations?  
This entire allegation, which has serious implications for multiple operators IF more or less accurate, is built on an entire series of "if" statements.  Where are the facts?  
73, ron w3wn
    On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 02:25:28 PM EDT, John Crovelli <w2gd at hotmail.com> wrote:  
 
 
The 2023 ARRL DX CW results show FS/KO1A (IZ3EYZ) winning the SOAB Low Power category over VP2V/AA7V.  What caught my eye was a non-US citizen using a US/FCC issued callsign operating from a French possession.  Was that allowed under CEPT?

I looked into this further.  Under CEPT Recommendation TR/61 as amended (https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Reciprocal%20operating%20forms/TR6101.pdf ) the CEPT rules specify an operator from a CEPT country must use the callsign assigned in his or her home country when invoking a CEPT authorization in a CEPT country. Both Italy and France are CEPT participants.  In this case TR/61 says using FS/IZ3EYZ would be compliant.

USA CEPT rules (see https://www.arrl.org/cept) say a non-US citizen may use a US issued callsign only while operating in the US or from a US Territory.  IZ3EYZ is not a US Citizen yet he used his US/FCC issued call while operating outside the US (on French St. Martin).

It seems highly unlikely the French Government granted him special authorization to use a US issued callsign on French Saint Martin in lieu of his Italian call.  He could have applied for a "TO" call and been totally legal.

So the questions:  Was the use of FS/KO1A for this ARRL DX CW operation legal under US CEPT rules governing the use of a US issued call?  If not a legitimate use of his US call, should the operator have been awarded first place over VP2V/AA7V in the results?  If we agree use of an unauthorized callsign took place,  should the operation be assigned check log status or be disqualified under ARRL DX rules?  And one more question, should the contacts made with FS/KO1A be given credit under the DXCC program if the callsign was in fact unauthorized?

Regards,

John, W2GD/P44W
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest