You said:
> If you look at the 2 examples, the SS Cabrillo data does not have the
> callsign as part of the exchange any different then the VHF example does.
> The VHF contest does not require the call sign in the exchange.
>
> But I've think I've explained this the best I can and if folks don't look
> past the rule, which no one seems to be challenging, and look at the logic
> of it and the required file the ARRL wants to have submitted to them, it
> seems the 2 don't match.
There is no logical requirement for the Cabrillo file and the exchange to
match each other. The only requirement for the Cabrillo file is that it must
contain all of the information that was in the exchange, in a format that is
suitable for the log-checking software. If the contest exchange contains
some redundancy, as in the SS and the Sprint contests, the Cabrillo file
does not need to reflect that redundancy. In fact, redundancy in the
Cabrillo file would raise new problems - what is the log-checking software
supposed to do when the redundant information doesn't match?
On the other hand, for formatting purposes the Cabrillo file may in some
cases contain fields that were not part of the exchange (see the CQ WW RTTY
Cabrillo format for an example). Again, there is no need for the Cabrillo
file and the actual exchange to match 1-to-1; the fact that the Cabrillo
file needs a placeholder is not in itself a reason to add a meaningless
element to the exchange.
Redundancy in the exchange is not necessarily a bad thing. The call sign in
the Sprint exchange is redundant, but no-one is calling for its removal,
because the contest wouldn't work as well without it. The CQ zone in the CQ
WW DX contests is almost redundant (for everyone except US stations, where
the zone is not a given), but that doesn't mean it would make sense not to
send it.
On an unrelated but similar issue, whenever I see someone who doesn't ID
after every QSO, I always wonder whether they have ever read the
regulations. Certainly in Canada and the US, and I would guess almost
everywhere else, it is a regulatory requirement to identify your station at
least once during every QSO. Despite this fact, there are any number of
people who seem to think it is OK to conduct multiple QSOs without sending
their call sign simply because it is expedient to do so, and regardless of
the regulations.
73,
Rich VE3KI
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|