To: | cq-contest@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for Cabrillo -- and the phone skimmer, new idea |
From: | Tom Osborne <w7why@frontier.com> |
Date: | Sat, 11 Apr 2015 09:50:18 -0700 |
List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
Isn't 'excessive bandwidth' cheating? It is against the rules. Why
wouldn't they 'outed' and be disqualified?
I'm sure after 10 people tell you your audio is terrible, you should get the message. 73 Tom W7WHY On 4/10/2015 10:52 AM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote: I have never understood thought process behind not publicly "outing" the offenders. Most of them know they have crappy or very wide audio. They do it on purpose.The best medicine would to pass these lousy signals by but people won't because they have to have that one contact, at least tell them their audio is lousy and you hope that nobody reports them, ahem.....Mike W0MU _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
Previous by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for Cabrillo --..., Pete Smith N4ZR |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for Cabrillo --..., Jim Brown |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for Cabrillo -- and the phone skimmer, new idea, Jim Brown |
Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for Cabrillo --..., K4XS via CQ-Contest |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |