My comments are intermingled with yours below.
> My question is - why MUST the call be part of the exchange
> when it's already "exchanged" as part of the QSO initiation
> process? The second call exchange serves little or no useful
> purpose - it is effectively a handicap imposed on all QSOs.
Sweepstakes was originally a contest among traffic handlers, and the contest
exchange mimics the old NTS traffic handlers message header. In that
header, the "callsign" was the callsign of the originating station (which
might or might not be YOUR station).
> Of course, exchanging the call twice may help to reduce
> logging errors. This would apply equally to the QSO Number,
> Precedence, Check and Section - but there is no requirement
> to repeat those.
It also eliminates waiting 10 or 15 minutes to figure out who the jerk is
that doesn't ID his station, as often happens in other contests. ;-)
> If "own call" is indeed an essential part of the standard
> exchange of information, why then is it omitted from the
> exchange fields in the Cabrillo specification for SS QSOs?
It ISN'T omitted in the CABRILLO spec. Below is a snippet from an SS
QSO: 14076 CW 2008-11-02 1911 K0HB 700 M 62 MN W2LHL 226 A 52
QSO: 14076 CW 2008-11-02 1913 K0HB 701 M 62 MN NI6T 293 U 56
QSO: 21031 CW 2008-11-02 1919 K0HB 702 M 62 MN KH7Y 557 A 56
QSO: 14076 CW 2008-11-02 1926 K0HB 703 M 62 MN K1ZZI 668 U 62
QSO: 14076 CW 2008-11-02 1927 K0HB 704 M 62 MN VY1EI 232 B 06
QSO: 14076 CW 2008-11-02 1928 K0HB 705 M 62 MN N5KEV 94 A 03
QSO: 14076 CW 2008-11-02 1929 K0HB 706 M 62 MN W5EB 45 A 64
I understand you Irish have a SweepStakes too, but the exchange seems to
entail sums of cash.
73, de Hans, K0HB
CQ-Contest mailing list