CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Holding a QRG: ethics vs rules

To: CQ Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Holding a QRG: ethics vs rules
From: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:55:33 -0800
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 12:29:12PM -0000, Alexander Teimurazov wrote:
> 
>  About other things
>  I think that practice is moove Multi operator to Extreme category because 
> its like member of their team doing additional work for them and same for 
> SOAB
>  You can imagine if for example some one will keep freq for me on the low 
> bands for example and then I qsy and start running pileup immediatly thats 
> great advantage
>  Problem is its not easy to approve people is using that practice
>          73          Al 4L5A

Exactly.  I don't understand why people think it's fair that a true 
single-station, single-operator should be competing against what amounts to
a multi-station team.  To me, having a buddy hold your frequency is no 
different than getting your buddy to help you out by spotting you frequently, 
or tune up a lot on top of anyone who gets too close to your frequency or 
whose score is too getting too high, or getting your buddy to find and asking 
(or tricking) rare mults into QSYing to your frequency to work you, etc.

-- 
Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
kenharker@kenharker.com
http://www.kenharker.com/

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>