[Cwo] a couple more

[Jim Talens]

I still did not take it as a serious contest!!   I viewed it as the annual,
more serious CWT.  I must not be alone judging by what somebody else said.
But no matter, because if the purpose is to finely examine the logs to
fairly grade the competitors by dinging those who err, I could care less.

jt

-----Original Message-----
From: k6rb at baymoon.com [mailto:k6rb at baymoon.com] 
Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2011 10:46 AM
To: Jim Talens
Cc: 'Don Greenbaum'; 'Alan Maenchen'; cwo at kkn.net
Subject: Re: [Cwo] a couple more

Wrong! CWO is a CONTEST! CWT is the non-contest. CWO is adjudicated and
logs are checked. So, if you want to play fast and loose, that's okay, but
you'll get dinged for it in score. The people who chose to play in CWO,
for the most part, are serious about it.

Rob K6RB


> Definitely I agree with Don. I wasn't careful at all.  It didn't matter.
> It wasn't a contest.  It was an activity.  So what if I called Pete
> "Pedro"
> and recorded it that way?  Or I got the wrong number and didn't bother
> correcting when I then heard it again?  In fact, I am not sure all this
> log
> evaluation is consistent with our "non-contest" theology for CWO.
>
> jt
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cwo-bounces at kkn.net [mailto:cwo-bounces at kkn.net] On Behalf Of Don
> Greenbaum
> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2011 8:41 AM
> To: Alan Maenchen; cwo at kkn.net
> Subject: Re: [Cwo] a couple more
>
> I can see how I got 124 vs 134 for W1RM...Pete was esp copy.
>
> The other busted number?????   I give up.
>
> I was just in it to give points, so I was very lazy on correcting the name
> filled in by writelog.  I suspect a lot of others felt the same way.
> makes
> it harder on you though so I'll be more careful next year.  Sloppy habit
> holdover from CWT where no one sees the log.
>
> Don
>
> At 06:14 PM 9/29/2011, Alan Maenchen wrote:
>>Attached are N1DG and NO5W reports.;
>>
>>Here's where being "hard-ass" hits the road.
>>
>>SCOT (sent) vs SCOTT (received)
>>SERGE (sent) vs SERGEI (received)
>>JULES (sent) vs JULIUS (received)
>>
>>
>>However, I'm accepting ROCK (received) vs ROQ (sent) since the vast
> majority (149 of 256) copied ROCK from NE7D.
>>I'm not sure about this one, but I suspect NE7D did indeed send ROCK some
> times even though ROQ is what's in his Session 1 log as 'sent'. In his
> Session 2 log, NE7D lists 'ROCK' as his name.  Presumably  >100 people
> copied "ROQ" scattered over different sessions. I don't have the software
> to
> tackle this one, so I'm just going to accept both names.
>>
>>Alan
>>
>>PS .. I'll be QRT on the internet in another couple of hours.  Back on
> Monday after CQP
>>
>>Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="NO5W.RPT"
>>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="NO5W.RPT"
>>X-Attachment-Id: f_gt6atfdt0
>>
>>Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="N1DG.RPT"
>>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="N1DG.RPT"
>>X-Attachment-Id: f_gt6atm9h1
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Cwo mailing list
>>Cwo at kkn.net
>>http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
>
>
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email
>
> www.gulftrackservices.com
> Don Greenbaum
> 27 Pill Hill Lane, Duxbury, MA 02332
> phone: 781 934 5534
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwo mailing list
> Cwo at kkn.net
> http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwo mailing list
> Cwo at kkn.net
> http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
>
>