[Cwo] CWO awards

[Alan Maenchen]

Hi Rob,

Yes, I did.  I agree the awards should be individualized. I think they were
hoping for general purpose awards that could be made up well in advance,
then handed out later after the winner is determined. I made it clear that
is NOT what we want.

He also asked for a date by which we need them.  I suggested December, but
I'm uncertain.  I just now received the logs from Bruce. The good news is
that I got a great start on the checking software and it seems to be 70%
there. I can dupe check and score successfully. Now working on cross
checking name and NR. BTW, if anyone asks, we received 368 logs for CW
OPEN.  Not what I was hoping for, but considering the problems in EU and AS,
it's a good start.

I need help from ALL of you to look at the recorded call list and feed back
to me any dubious calls that may be a bust. It doesn't need to be a proven
bust, just a suspicion.  Software will be available to help track them
down... but it can't figure it out by itself.

73, Alan  AD6E

PS .. just back from N.C. this evening. Diving was a bust due to high surf
kicked up by hurricane Katia.  It's 1am by my eastern time zone internal
clock. I'm QRT.




On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:34 PM, <k6rb at baymoon.com> wrote:

> Alan,
>
> I did not follow up with you on the message from the guy from Icom, but I
> don't think the awards should be identical and the differentiator is some
> piece of paper given to the recipient. I think each award should list the
> person's name, call, the session, and the award category (e.g. high power,
> etc.). Did you follow up with him on that? If it's a cost issue, I'm sure
> CWops would make up the difference.
>
> 73,
> Rob K6RB
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwo mailing list
> Cwo at kkn.net
> http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.kkn.net/pipermail/cwo/attachments/20110913/ac9fb43a/attachment.html