[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] serious question clarification

Subject: [CQ-Contest] serious question clarification
From: k5ka@earthlink.net (Ken Adams K5KA)
Date: Thu Jan 16 09:18:25 2003
At 11:35 PM 1/15/03 -0500, you wrote:

>I call CQ, a station calls, I work him, he goes away.  So far so good?

Well, he thinks it was a good QSO.

>   Now
>I look up at what I typed and can't make heads or tails out of or,, say, the
>name's got a typo so I backspace back to fix the name, foolishly deleting
>the QSO number and not realizing it.
>So now I am in a position where I don't want to log the info because I know
>it is not right; but the other guy delivered a perfectly good QSO.

So he should not be penalized.

>I don't mind losing the QSO - because what I did was really stupid.  Why
>should the other guy, who delivered a 100% perfect, solid QSO, get dinged
>for my stupidity?

That is why the QSO should be left in your log.

>Why should my UBN report get dinged when it is not "an error" per se, since
>I already am fully aware its wrong, and would like to submit the line item
>for informational purposes only but not count it toward my score?

Is there a penalty involving the loss of additional QSO's for NAQP?
If you only lose this QSO, then you don't get "dinged".

>Someone else said "just make it for zero points" but I don't believe that is
>possible in a Cabrillo submission.

This would be the most appropriate solution, but I think a prior thread
by the masses determined this was not possible (at the current time).

If you were on the receiving end of this you would want me to leave
the QSO in my log.

Ken K5KA

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>