If one looks at this in the context of the CQ 160 contest, then while what
Richard has outlined sure sounds like "assisted", CQ 160 doesn't even have
an assisted single-op category.
>From CQ's website
http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/160rules01.html
<<Classes: Single and multi-operator only. Use of packet, a spotting net,
or logging assistance makes an entry multi-operator.>>
Now, what kind of "help" did station A receive? It wasn't logging, wasn't a
spotting net and wasn't packet. I suppose one could argue that it's
*legal*. But not *contesting*.
73 Mike
n2mg@contesting.com
On Tue, 27 February 2001, "Richard L. King" wrote:
>
>
> I heard something interesting this weekend while I was tuning around on
> 160M during the CQ 160M SSB Contest. I think what I heard is worthy of a
> little discussion here as too whether it is against the rules or merely an
> ethical issue. Here is what happened:
>
> *************
>
> Station A is calling CQ on a frequency where he has obviously been for
> quite some time.
>
> Station B calls him and says, "One of the multipliers that you need is on
> xxxx frequency".
>
> Station A say, " Yes, I still need that. I will be right back".
>
> Station B begins calling "CQ Contest" on Station A's frequency and works a
> couple of guys.
>
> Station A returns and says, "Thanks and I still need three more mults and
> they are xx, yy, and zz."
>
> Station B says, "OK, I will let you know if I hear them somewhere."
>
> **************
>
> Now I certainly have my opinion as to whether this is proper of not but I
> wonder how others feel about it. One of the factors here is I don't know
> whether Station A is going to enter the assisted or unassisted category.
>
> Any opinions out there?
>
> 73, Richard
>
> k5na@texas.net
>
________________________________________________
PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|