To: | CQ-Contest@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Rules and the District of Columbia |
From: | "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <NN3W@prodigy.net> |
Date: | Tue, 31 May 2005 19:30:26 -0500 |
List-post: | <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
> >Eric, > > >Why should DC be a multiplier? If you create a separate multiplier >for DC (which is treated as Maryland for WAS purposes), then you >need to create multipliers for every Indian reservation, national >park. monument and federal facility in every other state. > This reminds me of the K7SS/PTI "DXpedition" from 1990 or thereabouts. I can't remember what Don Search's response to that DXCC request was. Rich NN3W _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Rules and the District of Columbia, N7MAL |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Rules and the District of Columbia, Kenneth E. Harker |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Rules and the District of Columbia, Eric Rosenberg |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |