Better yet, try to work them. When they come back to you, send them the
report and "call?". If they ignore you, then move on. You log nothing.
They log you. They will get a NIL penalty. Good.
73,
Steve, N2IC
On 02/23/2016 03:28 AM, Tom Carrubba KA2D wrote:
Simple solution. Don't work them!
I usually S&P and get decent rate going, I will not work a station who
does not ID in a timely manner.
Sure, it diminishes my score but it also affects theirs..
So, no ID, no qso
73 -Tom KA2D
-----Original Message----- From: Drew Vonada-Smith
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 6:14 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Your Call?
All,
Key clicks and GJ0KE were indeed annoying this contest. But what drove
me nuts, and I am surprised not to be reading it from others yet, was
the "No ID while running" situation. ***It has gotten much worse***.
The practice seems to be most evident in SA and the Caribbean.
I heard *many* stations not IDing for a dozen QSOs. I heard one not ID
for over 15 minutes - I felt compelled to stay there and measure it.
This destroys the rate of people doing unassisted S&P. Many good
contesters in the Caribbean make great rates and ID every or nearly
every QSO. So this practice is a way to improve your rate by a tiny
fraction at the cost of a HUGE impact on others. This is not within the
spirit or rules of any contest. It is poor sportsmanship at best.
To make it worse, a few stations (and I will name names from my notes if
asked) refused a fill even when working a station asking "Call?" And I
heard one pointedly answered "NO" when a dozen in the pileup repeatedly
asked for "CALL?" This isn't just bad practice, it is spitting in the
face of others who operate skillfully.
I've actually had contesters tell me proudly how efficient they were
because after each QSO in a big run, they skip the TU and their call and
just send a dit. We need to change this mindset.
Perhaps no rule changes are needed. But I call upon all of you to join
in publicly noting that this isn't acceptable. And I call upon sponsors
to get tough on abusers. If no reasonable attitude is forthcoming, the
solution is to require a callsign every QSO. That may be seen by some
as "extreme", but IMHO, this is best practice in any case.
73, Drew K3PA
_______________________________________________
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
|