Why waste time editing out the first contact? By doing that you may be
causing someone else to get a penalty who otherwise may not.
For example in cqww.
1. you work k1ttm and log him as k1ttt either as a typo or because you
copied him wrong.
2. k1ttt calls you and you call it a dupe and remove the first k1ttt
3. when the logs get checked they look at k1ttm's log and try to find the
contact in your log, which you erased, so he gets a penalty as nil...
however if you had left the k1ttm he would get the credit because you copied
him one character off, but you would (properly) get penalized for a busted
1. you work k1ttt and log properly
2. later k1ttm calls you and you copy it as k1ttt and remove the earlier
3. when the logs get checked they bust the k1ttt contact and give penalty
for a nil that was a perfectly good contact. You also lose the contact that
would otherwise have been good, but you do avoid the penalty. K1ttm would
get credit for the second k1ttt that you logged incorrectly, but you would
get penalized for a busted call. So by removing the good qso you lose the
first points, and k1ttt gets penalized, and you get penalized for the second
there are probably many more possible combinations, but over all it is
generally considered better to leave in all the qso's as you log them. The
computers doing the scoring know how to score dupes, the log checkers know
how to score them and there is never a penalty for having a dupe, and there
can be penalties if you accidentally remove a good contact... plus it almost
always takes longer to argue with the other guy than to just log it again,
and if you are wrong, you lose again! There is also at least one contest
who's rules require you to leave in dupes... I don't know what they might do
if you removed them, but they want to see the dupes in the log.
David Robbins K1TTT
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of email@example.com
> Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 13:19
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Worked Before...
> I always agree to leave only the new QSO in the log in these
> Plus I clearly say I will remove the first QSO.
> Keep your logs clean.
> Jukka OH6LI
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of ext Scott
> > Pederson
> > Sent: 31 March, 2005 20:08
> > To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] Worked Before...
> > All,
> > I encountered an incident a couple of times this last weekend
> > during WPX SSB.
> > Once was on 10m SSB working an SA station, and he gave me
> > "sorry, worked
> > before". I did not have him in my log (nothing close, but it
> > may have been a
> > "Senior Moment") so I asked him if I could work him again.
> > He said "well, uh, sure!" We exchanged reports and went on our way.
> > - Dupe for him, no penalty
> > - New contact for me, no penalty
> > Simple!
> > Just work 'em all and move on.
> > 73!
> > Scott - KI5DR
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list