If the goal eventually is to make everyone id every contact, why the
delay in including the callsign in the exchange.
Me CQ W0MU
You W5OV
Me W5OV W0MU 599 T8
you W0MU W5OV 599 T8
Me W0MU or TU or EE or whatever
Or some variation of the above.
Mike W0MU
On 6/26/2014 10:14 AM, w5ov@w5ov.com wrote:
KK9A's perspective on this is well-informed, and correct.
The proposed wording of the rule leads one to id-ing often without setting
a specific parameter to be measured. I think this is appropriate to allow
for the judgement of the operator rather than set a specific #.
Those who don't id often enough are shooting themselves in the foot.
73,
Bob W5OV
On Wed, June 25, 2014 11:52 am, john@kk9a.com wrote:
Regarding the WPX contest, the ID rule was already enacted before most of
us had a chance to give our opinion. I doubt any feedback after the
contest would change things and by then it was old news. I personally did
not care for the WPX 3 qso ID rule. There were definitely times during
WPX
CW when I heard another weaker station calling but after being forced to
ID the new group of stations drowned him out. These weaker station had to
wait longer to work me and some may have just QSYed. If an identification
rule is desired, the CQWW proposed rule "6. Running stations not
identifying in a timely manner (i.e., 1 minute)." is very reasonable. I
know that K5ZD spent time getting various personal opinions on this
beforehand and the rule seems to be a good compromise for both running
stations and S&P.
73,
John KK9A aka P40A
To: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Comments on CQWW Rules
From: Michael Adams <mda@n1en.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:15:15 +0000
Did anyone tally the feedback made _after_ WPX about stations that felt
they were more/less disadvantaged because of the ID requirement, or
stations that that found the contest more/less fun because of the rule
change?
To be honest, I don't remember much post-contest feedback one way or the
other; I just remember a lot of fuss when the change was announced.
While I think that a strong argument could be made that ID frequency is a
strategy choice that could be of concern between competitive stations in
a close race, I also think that a stronger argument could be made that
having running stations ID more frequently might enhance the enjoyment of
little guns or casual operators who fill the logs of the competitive
stations.
Personally, I don't think that the proposed rule change is the end of the
world. But I'd play in the contest and have fun regardless of whether
the change was made. Others' mileage may vary.
--
Michael Adams | N1EN | mda@n1en.org
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|