N4ZR added after I suggested that because the DXCC rule
change & N7NG's departure were well before the first time
CQ WW published entrants' logs, that this whole context
thing is rubbish (what the rule says apparently doesn't
matter - 'rule of man' as opposed to 'rule of rule', according
to W5OV & supported with some enthusiasm by
not-wearing-his-CQ-WW-hat KR2Q):
>I guess maybe I've missed something here. Let's assume that W4ZR works
>someone in CQWWCW that I need for DXCC. They publish the log, and I write
>to the QSL manager and claim that it was me, not that W4 guy. I get a QSL,
>and then W4ZR writes to the same manager and asks for a QSL. I am
>SO busted...
>
>Wouldn't the risk of this happening be enough to deter most sane people?
Pete, I am tempted to suggest that others might not
have the same standards, morals, ethics, etc as we
do.
We are also unlikely to kill, rape or steal, but for
some reason pretty much all modern civil societies
have laws to deal with those who are otherwise
inclined to do so.
You have hit on an important point, though - QSL
managers really should not be dealing with not-in-log
requests. This is why I would never have a QSL
manager, no matter how much the DXing community
believes they deserve one (integrity might be
important, but apparently saving on postage is even
more important to them).
73, ex-VR2BrettGraham/p.
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|