| To: | cq-contest@contesting.com | 
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL Rule Change for Remote Ops - Always Multi-op? | 
| From: | K9MA <k9ma@sdellington.us> | 
| Date: | Sun, 30 Jul 2017 10:10:48 -0500 | 
| List-post: | <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> | 
I know it's not always true, but I just assume the guest ops are getting 
some support from their hosts, so I just ignore their scores when 
comparing to my own.  (Not that I'm ever in contention for a top spot, 
anyway.)  I also ignore the scores of those I know just hired someone to 
build their antenna systems.  While I don't think any rule changes are 
necessary, those folks aren't in my category. There are plenty of 
top-scoring operators who ARE!
73, Scott K9MA -- Scott K9MA k9ma@sdellington.us _______________________________________________ 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] ARRL Rule Change for Remote Ops - Always Multi-op?, Ed Sawyer | 
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL Rule Change for Remote Ops - Always Multi-op?, Yuri | 
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL Rule Change for Remote Ops - Always Multi-op?, Ed Sawyer | 
| Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL Rule Change for Remote Ops - Always Multi-op?, Yuri | 
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |