CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Omitting callsigns in echanges

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Omitting callsigns in echanges
From: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 10:38:02 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Your exchange is based on an ARRL radiogram header and has FIVE parts:

For this specific reason, SS is unique.  The originating station's callsign is 
part of the header of a formal radiogram; the message could not be 
handled properly without it.

Much of the origin of the SS exchange is gone.  We're no longer expected to 
formulate an actual message; basically, we're sending a series of empty 
e-mails by radio!  Still, given the history of the contest, I don't think it's 
right to suggest that the sending station's callsign is redundant and 
should be removed from the exchange.  It's simply part of what makes SS SS and 
not the NAQP.

Personally I don't feel strongly one way or the other about DQing anyone who 
doesn't send it.  Out of 400 QSOs, I had *one* who didn't send his call 
in the exchange.  I do think it threw off the rhythm a bit, and (not wanting to 
test my software's exchange parser *during* the contest) I had to read 
his call out of the callsign window & retype it into the exchange window.  IMHO 
not sending your callsign in the exchange greatly increases the chance 
someone will need to ask you for a fill.  Whether you get DQd for it or not 
(and again, I really don't care) I do think it's a bad idea.

-- 

Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View, TN  EM66
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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