> When will they realise that two letters only and
> stupid list systems do not increase your run rate, which is the objective
in
> a contest?
Stewart,
I usually promise myself not to enter into these kind of debates, but ...
The two letter crap comes from people who think that if one talks fast enough
and loud enough one will be the first to be heard --- same kind of people who
think that the solution, when faced with trying to communicate in a language
one doesn't know, is loud yelling in a language one does know.
The no-call-sign mentality (except for the situation you describe of pileup
control) comes I think from a self-centered view -- "I know what my call is,
the rest of the world should also".
I was struck by the vast difference between the 99 and 98 IARU 'test
behaviour (at least on CW) regarding sending callsigns more often, and
verifying that both calls were correct. Might it have something to do with
the fact that serious logchecking was done in IARU 98 for the first time, and
it was not the subject of any special announcement??? I know I was a lot
more careful this year than last.
> There MUST be a way of teaching operating technique to radio
> amateurs. Otherwise we have a hobby totally out of control. I could go
on...
>
It's really simple -- it's called negative reinforcement -- if the technique
is poor, don't work them ... Undoubtedly some of the people will figure out
that if they do give a full callsign, they get a QSO quicker, and maybe the
lesson will stick. It works for my dog. --- and for the ones who don't
figure it out --- well, that was Darwin's point.
Cheers/73,
Bill
W1HIJ
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|