* On 2011 07 Nov 12:41 -0600, Georgek5kg@aol.com wrote:
> I am throwing this out there for comment.
>
> In SS, I worked a number of ops who did not send their callsign as part of
> the exchange. I found this to be very frustrating for several reasons,
> namely (1) sending the callsign as part of the "required exchange" is
> specified in the SS rules, (2) it breaks the rhythm when copying the
> exchange, and
> finally (3) it gives the op an advantage by not taking time to send his
> callsign.
Agreed! I put this up on eHam yesterday and hadn't gotten around to
starting a thread here. They didn't get an advantage from me as the
lack of the call often required a repeat for me to get the Check and
Section copied.
> Question: Should there be a penalty for not sending the callsign as part of
> the required exchange?
Perhaps not this year yet. I may go ahead and note the calls of those
shortcutting the exchange and if we agree that we will post them, then
that is what I'll do.
As I see it, dropping the callsign--a required part of the
exchange--would be no different than dropping the signal report when it
is required. After all "everyone is 59(9)".
73, de Nate >>
--
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."
Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://www.n0nb.us
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|