CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC 24 hours M/M

To: "brian coyne" <g4odv@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC 24 hours M/M
From: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
Reply-to: Igor Sokolov <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 23:43:40 +0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Brian,
I don't want to pretend I know all the logic of RDXC sponsors. I am sure 
they can answer most of your questions if you ask them directly. I think 
there must be something attractive in their innovative approach because this 
contest gains more and more popularity and Cyprus is pretty well situated to 
win this contest from :)

73, Igor UA9CDC

___________________________________________________________
>As far as I know the above statement is not quite correct. If someone's log
>is missing the attempt is made to recreate sort of a artificial log of that
>station based on available logs. That technically mean that if that
>non-combatant worked not only one but several participants, the likelihood
>of counting his contacts for points is pretty high.
Igor.

So an artificial log can be created and those points can be allowed.

I don't feel that I am 'nit picking' if I ask how do they know that the 
operator of that non combatant station copied my call or serial no 
correctly?

Whether he did or not no one shall ever know.but I may get the 
points.whereas when he submits a log and busts my serial no I lose the 
points for sure. Personally I feel that RDXC are being too clever by half in 
attempt to be innovative. If,as has been said here by some posters, that the 
adjusted scores after these penalties does not alter the claimed standings 
then what was the point of it all anyway?

73  Brian 5B4AIZ.


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

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