> Send a VERY
> short CQ, like "TEST MYCALL", a couple times before launching a longer CQ. If
> the frequency is in use, you'll hear about it eventually, but don't assume
> that just because you didn't get an immediate response the frequency is
> "yours". Imagine yourself on the other end.
>
> When you're on the receiving end of the QRL?, sometimes you can just send a
> quick "dit" (with QSK) without losing anything you're trying to
copy.
Now we are getting somewhere. I like this idea. The QRL scenario
needs more abbreviation for CW contests. This would have to be
adopted by convention among contesters so we would all
recognize it. Maybe a single dit for QRL and another dit for YES,
plus constant education of newbies on the need to keep it brief.
CW is a language of abbreviations.
Ron's comments, however, miss the point. If I am the guy with the
KW signal calling a little guy over and over (along with others) - and
he comes back to NOBODY and just CQs and CQs, then the little
guy has a real problem (no receiver, no ears, etc.). Can we do
anything to help him copy code? NO! If somebody takes his
frequency, will he ever even know? NO! If I have already given him
six chances to work me at his own code speed without taking his
frequency, isn't it time for a different approach if I am looking for a
good run frequency anyway? I truly don't feel like I am offending or
bullying anybody if I punch F1 and start giving out contacts to the
other frustrated guys that are calling him, and these opportunities
are just too kewl to pass up.
However, it is Jim's (KH2D) comments that I find most unfortunate.
He started this thread, cross-posting to this reflector and others
including the fine dx-list he himself hosts. I am very much in
sympathy with his original position, and my response touched on a
small point that would only be of interest to contesters. It was only
posted here. I clearly indicated that my intent is to establish a run
frequency in competitive CW environments with a minimum of
intrusive QRM, and showed how QRLing was not the whole
answer. I received a flame mail from Hans, K0HB (everybody does),
but never expected Jim to resort to such a personal approach -
considering that he has to manage the passions of such
immaturaties on his own reflector. In no way do I resemble the
inconsiderate stereotypical contester personality he seeks to bash
and demonize. Ad homonym argument has no place here. I will not
respond on that level, and choose not to respond at all to the
context of his flame.
Roy -- AD5Q
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|