I think a much better practice is to listen for "X" number of QSO's
for an ID (for me it's usually three), and if they don't ID in that
amount of time, put them in a memory and go elsewhere. I may check
back later to see if they're going to ID, but won't spend a lot of
time at it.
73, Zack W9SZ
On 11/5/13, john@kk9a.com <john@kk9a.com> wrote:
> So you worked the station and then remove the QSO from your log because
> you did not copy all of the necessary information? That is a terrible
> operating practice! It would be a much better to ask for the callsign
> during your report - just before you send your report. I have never seen
> anyone refuse to ID when asked this way.
>
> John KK9A
>
>
> To: CQ-Contest@CONTESTING.COM
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Running ID
> From: <w2lc@twcny.rr.com>
> Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 18:17:19 +0000
>
> When S&P I use the old adage of work-em first and worry about it later.
> However not IDing complicates that strategy. When S&P I try to keep the
> rate
> up, so I often call a station before I know who it is. If they do not ID
> very
> soon afterwards, I give them a NIL. Can’t log a QSO with the call sign
> field
> blank. Yes I sometimes put them into memory and listen later. Or use the
> second radio. But I am not going to wait 10 Q’s for an ID, 2 or 3 maybe
> but not
> much more.
>
> 73 Scott W2LC
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|