> From: Pete Smith <email@example.com>
> I think we need a convention for indicating the need for a fill,
> particularly when you're the station leaving the frequency. People seem to
> get more and more impatient about dumping their calls, and I anticipate
> losing several QSOs because I never could attract the station's attention.
I too found this frustrating. I thought it important to, when preparing to
call a station finishing a QSO, wait for the guy he was working to QSL his
exchange. But at least 35-40% of the time, you do that and you get beaten.
The Sprint exchange is already unusual in requiring transmission of both
callsigns. Maybe we need to provide that stations must also exchange
"R" or "QSL" or some other confirmation that the exchange was received?
With regard to people sending the exchange in the "wrong" order.. Looking
at the rules, I note that they show the "right" method as an example - but
they say "You may send this information in any order. For example:". Maybe
it would be a good idea to replace "For example:" with "The suggested method
is:".. or even stronger wording?
With recruiting efforts to get new operators on for the Sprints, we can
count on having plenty of entrants who've never done this contest before.
We can't count on them being aware of this convention - many of them will
read the posted rules and take them literally.
> This year, for the first time, I had a lot of trouble with RTTY stations
> between 7035 and 7040. I hope this doesn't mean that the RTTY guys made a
I didn't have much trouble with RTTY. There was plenty of activity but with
only rare exceptions they didn't do anything discourteous. (sp?) Actually
had more RTTY grief in SS.
I did, however, note an alarming number of CW ops transmitting without
listening first. I was running full QSK (with 1kw output). When, during my
CQ, I hear a 20-over-S9 signal, on 80 meters, launch a CQ of his own
zero-beat to my signal, I know darned well he didn't listen to the frequency
before plunking the keyboard. And when he keeps on CQing for 3-4-5 CQs, I'm
pretty confident it wasn't "wrong-radio confusion". This was not just one
or two operators.
In Sprint, with no "run frequency" to defend, this doesn't bother me much.
If the "victim" is a non-contester though, this kind of behavior can really
harm our pursuit. Even in Sprint, you NEED TO LISTEN TO THE FREQUENCY
BEFORE YOU TRANSMIT!
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com