Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Self\-spotting\,arranged\s+QSO\'s\s+and\s+the\s+CQ\s+160\s+contest\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "W7TMT" <w7tmt@dayshaw.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:15:30 -0800
Never knew this Chat service existed. I created an account and in under 5 minutes logged on. Used the "Chat Review" option from the menu and all is revealed. So that's how SOME of the Big Kids play t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00437.html (12,147 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Sandy Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:33:50 -0600
Clearly, at some point in the path is a non-Amateur means of communication being used for the solicitation of QSOs. So that's grounds for a DQ right there. And if CQ doesn't specify non-Amateur like
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00438.html (12,043 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:47:34 -0500
I'm not being critical of you Steve because arranging QSO's is outside the rules, but once something like that is posted it is a matter of a few mouse clicks to see the entire conversation including
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00440.html (13,161 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Richard L. King" <k5na@ecpi.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:27:52 +0000
If you look at the rules for the CQWW 160M Contest, there is nothing in the rules about self-spotting, etc. This might be an oversight. Actually, the only thing that remotely addresses this action is
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00441.html (13,611 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Sandy Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:26:54 -0600
A slight modification to what I said earlier: If the fellow is in any way competitive with anybody, then a DQ is in order. Doesn't need to be considered a violation of self-spotting rules for that to
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00443.html (15,720 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:19:11 -0000
"Self-spotting, etc" are considered to be un-sportsmanlike conduct. As such, they are prohibited under the "Disqualification" paragraph in the rules for CQWW 160M. 73, Paul EI5DI ____________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00445.html (8,994 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "W7TMT" <w7tmt@dayshaw.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:25:02 -0800
With all due respect is this not a violation of the "unsportsmanlike conduct" item listed under the CW 160 "Disqualification:" paragraph? 73/Patrick W7TMT --Original Message-- From: cq-contest-bounce
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00447.html (10,720 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:15:01 -0500
What I've been told is arranging QSO's during a contest is wrong and should never be done. To me it seems the same as getting on the phone and actually making the QSO. You find a clear spot, you kno
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00449.html (9,842 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:09:12 +0500
I would suggest contest sponsors check this chat against submitted logs. There are some other calls that were active in the contest. ES9C, UR4LRG , RL3FT for RL3A to name just a few. If their contest
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00452.html (9,227 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Russell Hill" <rustyhill@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:42:25 -0000
So WHO is the cheating op....Publicity of a proven behavior is likely the best deterrent. 73, Rusty, na5tr -- Original Message -- From: "W7TMT" <w7tmt@dayshaw.net> To: <n2ic@arrl.net>; "'CQ Contest'"
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00453.html (15,220 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:24:07 -0600
The unsportsmanlike conduct thing is too vague and not needed in this case. The rules say activity takes place on 160 meters, cw or ssb. The internet is NOT 160 meters, cw or ssb. Simple. It's a rule
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00455.html (12,522 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "N7MAL" <N7MAL@CITLINK.NET>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 05:38:46 -0000
WOW I guess my first question is where does this end? Do we start monitoring 2 meters, or telephone conversations, or even email/regular mail. Anyone who is shocked by N2IC's posting is still living
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00458.html (8,352 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Marijan Miletic" <s56a@bit.si>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:29:52 +0100
W8JI: I'm not sure that is a good way to get a multiplier or QSO. I've been operating CQ WW 160m CW since 1972 when YU got permission. Located in downtown S5 capital Ljubljana with HV transformer sta
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00468.html (8,204 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 08:17:07 -0700
Actually I think it points out that there is no way to stop this. People can watch spots anonymously any time they want. It points out that there are plenty of people out there the will bend/break an
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00469.html (10,520 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: mike l dormann <w7dra@juno.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 23:31:42 -0800
i get several (less than 10) requests like "hope to work you in the contest", or "will be looking for you" when i do a dxpidition like the CQWW160, but with no way of me knowing either my transmit fr
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00480.html (7,339 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting,arranged QSO's and the CQ 160 contest (score: 1)
Author: "Tonno Vahk" <tonno.vahk@mail.ee>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:56:20 +0200
Thank you Igor for bringing this up. I was not aware of that as I was not present at my station most of the contest. I got the printout of the chat from the weekend now and it appears that one of the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-01/msg00488.html (11,724 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu