CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A debacle

To: "donovanf@starpower.net" <donovanf@starpower.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A debacle
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 21:11:57 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Try to find an RBN spot for a TF3M on 40 meters on Nov 30.

73...Stan, K5GO

Sent from my iPad

> On May 10, 2015, at 4:14 PM, donovanf@starpower.net wrote:
> 
> Juan, 
> 
> 
> You've discovered an extremely unusual pattern in the TO7A public log 
> that's very difficult to rationalize. 
> 
> 
> Three of the 160 meter European QSOs in TO7A's log have public logs: 
> ON4TO, UT5URW and R6KY. There is no TO7A 160M QSO in 
> any of these logs. 
> 
> 
> There's a remarkable run of 160 meter European QSOs from 0437-0608Z 
> Sunday in the TO7A's log but a lack of any of the very active 160 meter 
> European calls in the TO7A log.. It would be interesting to try to find the 
> European calls in the 0437-0608Z TO7A 160 meter log and also the 
> PY1NP and LU2YE calls in the 160 meters in the logs of other very active 
> 160 meter stations such as CN2AA, 9K2HN, HK1NA and PJ2T. 
> 
> 
> I suspect only a tiny fraction of the European calls in that 0437-0608Z 160 
> meter run appear in any 160 meter log and PY1NP and LU2YE 
> probably won't be found either. 
> 
> 
> This unusual pattern may also appear elsewhere in the TO7A log... 
> 
> 
> 73 
> Frank 
> W3LPL 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> From: "Juan EA5RS" <ea5rs@ono.com> 
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com 
> Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2015 6:08:57 PM 
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A debacle 
> 
> Interesting debate, but I am afraid there has been some misleading 
> info/assumption on the reason for TO7A's DQ. 
> 
> I have not studied the log in detail, but if you are curious enough, have a 
> look at TO7A's 160m log: 
> Not one single station with a public log in zones 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20 or 
> 33 claims working TO7A on 160 
> Yet TO7A's log claims having worked 29 stations in these zones. 
> Most of these 29 QSOs are unique calls at least on 160, most do not have a 
> public log, and if they have a public log, the 160m QSO with TO7A is not 
> there 
> 
> Maybe this has something to do with why he has been DQd 
> I have performed a similar scrutiny with some of TO7A's competitors logs but 
> I haven't found a similar situation 
> 
> Just public logs data (5,8 million records) and some database code 
> 
> Juan 
> EA5RS 
> 
> -----Mensaje original----- 
> De: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] En nombre de Stan 
> Stockton 
> Enviado el: domingo, 10 de mayo de 2015 1:09 
> Para: W0MU Mike Fatchett 
> CC: cq-contest@contesting.com 
> Asunto: Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A debacle 
> 
>> On 5/9/2015 12:11 PM, Lloyd Cabral wrote: 
>> 
>> 
>> After following this thread, my only wish is that Randy would have 
> inquired here for another e-mail address 
>> for Dim, or another source of contact with him BEFORE bringing this issue 
> mainstream. Accusations as 
>> serious as this should first be handled privately with the accused given a 
> fair chance to defend himself. 
>> Stan K5GO hit the nail on the head with his previous post. IMHO, taking 
> Dim's case public right off seemed 
>> premature, unprofessional and totally unnecessary. 
>> Lloyd KH6LC 
> 
>> On May 9, 2015, at 3:15 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote: 
>> 
>> The guy got caught red handed and you people want to hang those that 
> caught him. 
> 
> Mike, 
> 
> I wish you had told everyone you had information showing or even saying he 
> got caught red handed a long time ago. Do you have some information that 
> says he was caught "red handed"? 
> 
> Everyone else is reading what has been written and the email posted on the 
> reflector says that the committee had a "belief" that he was using 
> assistance and substantiated the fact that it was a "belief" by asking him 
> to provide a recording (not required in the rules) in order to further 
> evaluate the situation. However, even in that email, the bottom line and 
> last sentence, after what would appear to be an attempt to communicate some 
> hope that there would be further evaluation, said emphatically and in no 
> uncertain terms that he was disqualified for 2014 but welcome to enter in 
> 2015. 
> 
> I am not making any assumption this process is as cut and dried as you would 
> like it to be. 
> 
> 73...Stan, K5GO 
> _______________________________________________ 
> CQ-Contest mailing list 
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com 
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> CQ-Contest mailing list 
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com 
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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