[CQ-Contest] CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 254, Issue 11

[Drew Vonada-Smith]

I'm NOT OK with RDXC rules and stopped operating it years ago.  Weaker (or farther from the coast) stations get unequally penalized for busted calls from THE OTHER GUY and not in their control.  Ultimately, this could encourage sending the other guy's exchange back to him for confirmation.  Do any of us want THAT to start?

Worse yet, one year I was slammed by >15% for working guys that were "not really in the contest" (quoting the sponsor)  when I was running casual US ops.  Working someone MAKES him in the contest.  We are doing no favor for contesting or ham radio when we tell casual ops trying to be friendly and give us a point that they don't count.

73.
Drew K3PA

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2024 14:07:02 -0500
From: Yuri <ve3dz at rigexpert.net>
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQMM DX Contest unwritten rule
Message-ID: <48069ef9-3233-47cd-8bf2-bd9dc8c64f6d at rigexpert.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

  >>>And it is impossible for the participants to know which contacts will count or not.

I wonder why everyone is Okay then with even more ridiculous rules in
RDXC - if one of the parties makes mistake in the call or exchange, the
QSO is being removed from both LOGs.
And this contest was among the most valuable contests for WRTC selection!
We can't control other party's copying and/or logging skills.
Especially with the army of modern "point-and-click'ers".

73, Yuri VE3DZ