Hi Everyone.
What an interesting thread! Orderly and lots of good discussion.
While most of the replies went to the list, I did receive some
privately. To those that wrote to either address, thanks for the
input.
It seems most of the responses fell into two cataegories, work the
station again as a dupe or not log the QSO at all. My thought is to
leave the contact in question stand in my log, after all I did log
his information correctly. I used proper phonetics during my end of
the exchange so I need not penalize myself for his error of not
verifying my call or exchange. Working the same station later
results in a dupe for me and a zero-point QSO, but it could ensure
that a valid contact is made each way (with my luck it'll get busted
again!). Keeping both QSOs in the log may give the log checkers an
easier time finding the other op's unique and be an accurate
representation of the events that took place. That is why we log
isn't it? Not logging the QSO would seem to leave the log checkers
with a tougher time finding the unique.
This discusion centered on what to do when we know the other
op has busted our call or exchange. Yes I have dumped Qs in the
past because they were never completed. Clearly, this is one of
those moral dilemma judgement calls we humans are stuck with making
from time-to-time. However, I'm sure there are many times when the
other op busts the call/exchange without our knowing in the process
of transcribing the contact. That is a whole other story, of course.
Thanks again for everyone's input.
73, de Nate >>
Packet | KA0RNY @ WF0A.#SCKS.KS.USA.NOAM | "If wires can be
Internet | ka0rny@midusa.net | connected in two
Location | Valley Center, KS USA EM17hs | different ways,
View yet another web page at: | the first way
http://homepage.netspaceonline.com/~ka0rny/ | blows the fuse!"
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|