To: | "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | [CQ-Contest] 2 point rule |
From: | Bob Kupps <n6bk@yahoo.com> |
Reply-to: | Bob Kupps <n6bk@yahoo.com> |
Date: | Thu, 28 Nov 2013 16:22:03 -0800 (PST) |
List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
Hi and thanks for all the comments. I am persuaded by the arguments in favor of retaining the 2 point rule for NA. In fact those arguments apply to other continents as well and IMO applying the 2 point rule equally across the globe for all intra-continental Qs would seem to go a long way toward reducing by half the penalty for crossing over arbitrary continental boundaries (3-2 vs 3-1). Would this rule change be an affront to anyone's sense of good sportsmanship and fair play? 73 Bob _______________________________________________ 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] Classic - Doing what was intended?, David Gilbert |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Why?, Tom Haavisto |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Towards a critical examination of the 2-point rule in CQWW, Mark |
Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] 2 point rule, Jack Haverty. |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |