Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+May\s+you\s+work\s+yourself\s+at\s+a\s+remote\?\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Art Boyars <artboyars@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 17:05:02 -0500
I think I broached this subject before, but got no significant response. Conversation with some of the other op's at a M-M this past weekend, and seeing W1VE's 3830score post for ARRL DX CW prompts m
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00199.html (7,950 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 19:19:52 -0500
Art, Whether or not it is technically possible, and whether or not the rules as they currently stand would allow this... If it were me, from a standpoint of my personal ethics, I would not condone (l
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00205.html (10,747 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Gerry Hull <gerry@yccc.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 22:36:36 -0500
Hi Art, In ARRL DX, DX works US/VE, not US/VE working US/VE... so their was no conflict operating W1VE and VY1AAA at the same time. In most "on the books" rules, your scenario is "legal" as far as th
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00210.html (9,715 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Tom Haavisto <kamham69@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 10:03:40 -0500
Hi Art Lets step back a bit, and see what is *technically possible - today*. A person could operate from all 40 zones in the CQWW - in one sitting, by connecting to 40 different stations and operatin
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00222.html (10,422 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 12:39:54 -0600 (CST)
Tom, Or, you could write a rule that says (in a more proper format, of course) that an operator at multi-op station may ALSO operate from his home station (ONLY) during those times he is not present
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00231.html (12,871 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Tim Shoppa <tshoppa@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:13:24 -0500
Contributing to more one than one score is called "Highly Motivated Operator" or HMO operation and as far as I know, is allowed in all contests. It may not make sense in all contests but is not ruled
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00233.html (8,947 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Gerry Hull <gerry@yccc.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:57:29 -0500
But, Tom, you could stay at home and participate as a member of the M/M via remote. Everyone looks at the downside -- there are so many positive sides. W7RN has a huge station, but his ops live far a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00234.html (13,933 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Tom Haavisto <kamham69@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:48:08 -0500
The idea is NOT to make operating remote look bad. Quite the opposite. Operating remote is now a fact of every day life for many people. I just wanted to "push the upper limit" as it were to see what
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00237.html (15,399 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: VK4TS Trent Sampson <vk4ts@outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 07:31:21 +1000
Spirit of the contest Plain and simple If a multi op member worked the multi op and only chosen others I feel the multi op should be DQd As has been pointed out it is only a case of money before a st
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00238.html (17,102 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Jack Brindle <jackbrindle@me.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 12:44:54 -0800
It seems that the rule from ARRL Field Day (yes, I know, but it has rules and is listed on the Contest page) should apply: 6.1. A person may not contact for QSO credit any station from which they als
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00239.html (17,991 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Larry <lknain@nc.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:17:04 -0500
I vaguely recall something in WW rules about not being an operator at more than one station but I am not at a place I can check it. I don't recall there was such a rule for other contests but that is
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00244.html (15,366 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Tom Osborne <w7why@frontier.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 16:30:59 -0800
Can you imagine if you could remote to some really rare sections in the SS and not work anyone but yourself? 73 Tom W7WHY It seems that the rule from ARRL Field Day (yes, I know, but it has rules and
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00251.html (10,330 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] May you work yourself at a remote? (score: 1)
Author: Charles Harpole <hs0zcw@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 09:06:01 +0700
I hold a K4 and a HS call sign, and depending on local interpretation of my permit papers also in 9N, A5, VU, and V2. Theoretically, I could use remotes in any of those places where allowed and after
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-02/msg00253.html (18,231 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu