John,
The results also were posted at the usual two websites, those of CQ
Magazine and WWROF CQWW (cq-amateur-radio.com [CQ-Amateur-Radio.COM
<http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/cq_contests/cq_ww_dx_contest/index_cq_ww_dx_contest.html>]
and
cqww.com [CQWW SSB Scores
<http://www.cqww.com/results/2016_cq_ww_dx_ssb_line_scores.pdf>]. I don't
know about post delivery of the paper magazine, I get it electronically --
it is identical to the paper and delivered wherever I happen to be in the
world on the first of the month. The electronic version arrived as
expected on April 1.
73, Dave K3ZJ
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 7:45 AM, john@kk9a.com <john@kk9a.com> wrote:
> Has the April issue been sent out?
>
> John KK9A
>
>
> To: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Disqualified callsigns – CQ WW SSB
> contest.
> From: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@arrl.net>
> Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:47:02 -0400
>
>
> It's printed at the end of the results in the April issue of CQ.
>
> 73,
>
> Paul, N8HM
>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:52 PM, DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I saw this on another list. Nothing on the CQWW Blog. Now I see it here:
> >
> > http://dx-world.net/disqualified-callsigns-cq-ww-ssb-contest/
> >
> > I find the following line disturbing: 'Reports suggest....'
> >
> > Any reason it had to be made public this way? I don't fault
> > the website, it was a scoop.
> >
> > We all want the CC to do its job, but why/how the info got out this way?
> > Somehow I doubt all these people volunteered the info they were
> > disqualified.
> >
> > 73 de Vince, VA3VF
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|