To: | <cq-contest@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] : Reverse beacon of my own call? |
From: | "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net> |
Date: | Thu, 25 Jul 2013 13:21:08 -0400 |
List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
I guess Ron and others missed this line in my last post. It is repeated here: "The rules should be written as "Don't use RBN for any purpose" if that is the point of the rule." If the intent is actually as some are broadly interpreting it, it should be removed from the sub heading of "QSO alerting assistance" and be a "prohibited use of technology for any use" in the assisted vs non-assisted definition. How can you possibly argue with that. Ed N1UR _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] : Reverse beacon of my own call?, Richard F DiDonna NN3W |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] : Reverse beacon of my own call?, David Gilbert |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] : Reverse beacon of my own call?, Ron Notarius W3WN |
Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] : Reverse beacon of my own call?, Edward Sawyer |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |