To: | "'CQ-Contest Reflector'" <cq-contest@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Some thoughts on uniques, was: 99% of uniques are busted |
From: | Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com> |
Date: | Tue, 05 Aug 2008 06:50:28 -0400 |
List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
At 06:05 PM 8/4/2008, Randy Thompson wrote: >When you look at the list of active calls that were reported from one >contest, it is amazingly easy to see the ones that are obvious busts of an >active call. Then there are all the rest. Contest sponsors have >traditionally leaned toward giving the benefit of the doubt for these. They don't seem to have done so this time at ARRL - I lost credit for every unique (7 I think, not counting busted calls)), including at least 5 that are confirmed to be active calls by QRZ. 73, Pete N4ZR _______________________________________________ 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: | [CQ-Contest] NAQP Triple Play Champ - Way to go (aka Threeathlon), Andrei Stchislenok |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Some thoughts on uniques, was: 99% of uniques are busted, Michael Coslo |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Some thoughts on uniques, was: 99% of uniques are busted, Randy Thompson |
Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Some thoughts on uniques, was: 99% of uniques are busted, George Fremin III |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |