More than just DX News

CQ WW CC and the American Valuable

It was the hyper-activity of the CQ WW CC members that made me write this, not the recent discussion on the new rules or something like that.

Many of the CQ WW CC members are perturbed by the publications on this website and try to prevent spreading the information.

They send letters to contesters asking for help to stop publications critisizing the CQ WW CC.

I got some messages like this which were written on CQ WW CC members' demand, it looks like the CQ WW CC members do not dare to ask me themselves.

Gentlemen, the CQ WW CC members, how about announced loyalty to american valuable like freedom of speech?

K3EST just conditioned the CQ WW CC members that if they want to be the Committee members they should be quiet and not oppose anything.

If you want to express your critical thoughts to CQ WW CC do not rely on cq-contest e-mail reflector as this reclector is rigidly moderated and controlled by the CQ WW CC members.

As far as I know Jamie NS3T has also been pressured because of his critical publications.

How would one stop ctirisizing the CQ WW CC if their actions are totally harmful.

Lets see the CQ WW 2008 results.

CW part.

As far as we know K3EST first disqalified RG9A, then changed his category to Assisted, then changed it to Unassisted.

The CQ WW CC members like to declare if the decision has been made then it is final.

Then on what basis K3EST in his narcissistic message, reporting his victory over the cheaters, claimed RG9A as a packet cheater?

What is this, some kind of disagreement with his own decision?

Now it is obvious that the decisions are final for the participants, but not for the CQ WW Contest Director.

N4PN story is also worth mentioning. I have read his message to the CQ WW CC of the contester with 57 years of contesting.

N4PN states that he has never violated any rules and let the CQ WW CC decide if he deserves the disqualification and if he does to disqualify him.

Then what the CQ WW CC does? Just removes N4PN from the contest results like N4PN had never participated in the contest.
The CQ WW CC actions like this became a common place and we have seen many other proofs of that.

Another thing worth mentioning is the author choosing the names for the CQ WW CC e-mail reflectors. For example, an e-mail reflector named "Faustus" (Faust). Let's have a look at Wikipedia.

"Faust" (and the adjective "Faustian") has taken on a connotation distinct from its original use, and is often used today to describe an unsavory, ultimately self-destructive arrangement; the proverbial "deal with the devil".

Was that the connotation?
There is a saying, something like "How you name a ship then it will sail just like it is named".

For me, CQ WW CC is not a ship but a submarine.

The "Beatles" did not know anything about the CQ WW CC, but their song ...

In the town where I was born,
Lived a man who sailed to sea,
And he told us of his life,
In the land of submarines,

So we sailed on to the sun,
Till we found the sea green,
And we lived beneath the waves,
In our yellow submarine,

And our friends are all aboard,
Many more of them live next door,
And the band begins to play.

(Full speed ahead, Mr. Barkley, full speed ahead!
Full speed over here, sir!
All together! All together!
Aye, aye, sir, fire!
Captain! Captain!)

As we live a life of ease
Every one of us(every one of us) has all we need
Sky of blue and sea green
In our yellow submarine.( Haha! )

Would fit nicely as the CQ WW CC hymn :-) but it has nothing to do with valuables.

73 Al 4L5A

CQ WW CC and the American Valuable comments forum

Your comments are important to us!

1 2 3 4 5


Rating: 5 of 5
  • Callsign: VK6ZRY
  • 2010-10-28 23:19:55
A good weekend to avoid the HF bands from all those once a year CW Ops.
Rating: 5 of 5
  • Callsign: W3WN
  • 2010-02-19 08:55:02
It's not just "famous" names like Jaime NS3T that are being blocked on the CQ Contest reflector. It happens quite a bit with many of us. Now I don't pretend to be a big gun. I operate contests for fun. But I've been contesting since my college years at K3CR (starting in 1975), even earlier if you count Field Day as a contest (1972). I think I know a few things; and on many things I may have something to say. But more often than not, when a discussion starts getting heated, posts to the reflector start heading to the bit bucket. Either only one side gets posted, or all discussions just vanish with no explanation. This is often followed by a pronouncement that a "consensus" has been reached, based on the reflector posts. Which makes one wonder what a true consensus is, if posts to the contrary evaporate before going through. Yes, the reflector (and the web site that hosts it) are privately owned, and yes, the owners and moderators have the right to set the rules. If you don't like the rules, don't post. But if you're going to change the rules, at least notify people. If you're going to censor, edit, or reject posts, notify people. And if you're going to rely on the reflector for input and advice, then take it with a grain of salt, in that more often than not, you're only getting the opinion(s) that a moderator feels are important -- not the whole picture. Otherwise you're dealing with the same "type of censorship that they had under Stalin!" (thanks Field of Dreams for the quote)
Rating: 5 of 5
  • Callsign: 4L5A
  • 2010-01-29 08:19:21
Guys do we need to worry about something? I think that will be better if we will indicate our calls anyway About cqcontest reflector yes its moderated and my posts is also not going through Today only reflector for contesters are wrtc2006 reflector Oms PY5EG allways support freedom of speech and contesting
Rating: 5 of 5
A U.S. Ham
  • Callsign: Anonymous
  • 2010-01-29 07:55:07
As far as I know Jamie NS3T has also been pressured because of his critical publications. --------------------------------------------------------- I can confirm that NS3T's posts are being rejected by cq-contest. Apparently they don't like investigative reporting or any news that "upsets the apple cart."