CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting explanation from CQWW blog

To: CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-spotting explanation from CQWW blog
From: Filipe Lopes <ct1ilt@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 19:22:03 +0200
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Be carefull Gerry, I am your FRIEND and so I will spot you hard and ugly
next CQ WW contests  :)   you might get DQed !!!


I maybe have to send an email to all "my friends" and mailing lists before
each contest to ask PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT SPOT ME otherwise I might get DQed
!!!!


My BLACK LIST is getting bigger and bigger for the next CQ WW CONTESTs,
everyone get ready for Disqualifications!  ;)


73's Filipe Lopes
CT1ILT


2017-04-17 23:13 GMT+02:00 Gerry Hull <gerry@yccc.org>:

> Bob,
>
> What constituency are you trying to serve by these draconian measures?
> This is a hobby, after all.   We are trying to bring new people into it.
> CQWW has been around for a very, very long time without all this
> foolishness.
>
> Maybe the top ten percent are complaining?   However, without the other
> 90%, you won't have a contest you'll be happy with.
>
> 73, Gerry W1VE
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 4:36 PM, <w5ov@w5ov.com> wrote:
>
> > OK.  That's enough.
> >
> > There was apparent evidence of off-air communication with VE3XIN and T48K
> > in approximately 60 suspicious spots of T48K.
> >
> > To confirm this and other claims of innocence, SDR recordings of T48K
> were
> > evaluated.
> >
> > During this review, several instances of T48K requesting to be spotted
> > over the air, directly in violation of the rules were noted.
> >
> > At that point, no further investigation was necessary and the
> > Disqualification confirmed.
> >
> > Those are the key facts of the T48K DQ.
> >
> > There were no hunches, feelings or other unsubstantiated reasons for the
> > T48K DQ.
> >
> > No "friends" spotted anyone a few times leading to a DQ.
> >
> > 73,
> > Bob W5OV
> > CQWW Contest Committee
> >
> >
> > On Mon, April 17, 2017 1:34 pm, Ed K1EP wrote:
> > > On Apr 17, 2017 2:11 PM, "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It is indeed time for some rules changes.  You cannot be DQing people
> for
> > >  the actions of others that we have no control over.  If you have proof
> > > of collusion or cooperation great.  To tell me you can DQ me because my
> > > neighbor thought he was doing something nice and spotted me a few times
> > > is over the top.
> > >
> > >
> > > Well that is exactly what KR2Q is telling you and what he has done. He
> > > will DQ a station because others have spotted him without that
> station's
> > > knowledge or consent and the station has no control over or
> communication
> > > with the spotter.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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>