I for one don't have a problem with this.
If you disagree with the exchange or the rigid format the exchange is
supposed to be sent in, then take it up with the League and argue your
point.
And please don't tell me "it can't be done." There is a very good reason
that the Pa QSO Party dropped the signal report from the exchange, many
years back... because a few of us (myself included) brought it up with
then-chairman W3HDH and made our case. Didn't happen overnight, mind you,
but it did happen.
But until the rule in question is changed, them's the rules & them's the
breaks.
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Michael Coslo
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 9:00 AM
To: CQ Contest
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SS SSB And Your Callsign In The Exchange
On Nov 17, 2008, at 10:22 PM, John Brosnahan -- W0UN wrote:
>
> I will write a letter to the ARRL requesting stations that blatantly
> violate the rules be disqualified. Thank you for bringing this to
> my attention. I suspect that I will not be the only one to do so.
Instead of trying to toss Ops out, why don't you lobby to change the
rule. Contest sponsors are not in the business of trying to disqualify
participants, especially about such trifling matters - and yes, this
is trifling. If a person makes fake QSO's, or can be proven operating
QRO while claiming QRP, or multi-op while claiming single-op, that is
the kind of thing we're interested in, not quite so much a argument
about having to exchange one part of the exchange twice.
Rejected Operators, especially for such a minor thing, tend to go away
and not come back. This whole discussion eventually starts to sound
like the arguments over 73 vs 73's.
>
> What is it with a culture that believes that if they don't like the
> rules they don't have to follow them? Isn't this what led to AIG,
> Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, etc.
I trust you are not calling me a part of that culture, John 8^|
And no, finding fault with this contest's exchange, the exchange
evidence not even included in the almost universal Cabrillo file, is
not a mindset that led to the financial crisis.
More likely, cannot reasonable people disagree? That exchange is not a
good one. It includes information that Ops can easily find "illegally"
- which is to say they can find the callsign part of the exchange in
the most likely of all places - in the callsign that you must have to
log the other Op.
-73 de Mike N3LI -
_______________________________________________
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
|