To: | "CQ contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | [CQ-Contest] CQWW and 0 pointers |
From: | "James Cassidy" <jimki7y@earthlink.net> |
Reply-to: | jimki7y@earthlink.net |
Date: | Mon, 9 Jul 2007 07:26:48 -0700 |
List-post: | <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
I think the higher percentage of 0 pointers have to be those who are not familiar with the contest rule and are just trying to help. Changing to the multiplier without a QSO would not help that situation. Maybe one good thing from these QSOs is that those not familiar with the rules will at least become more interested in contesting. 73 Jim Cassidy KI7Y jimki7y@earthlink.net _______________________________________________ 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] how contesters use K3 "squelch", Rick Tavan N6XI |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Code not dead!, Zack Widup |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW and 0 pointers, Courtney Judd |
Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW and 0 pointers, Richard DiDonna NN3W |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |