CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Incomplete SS exchange

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Incomplete SS exchange
From: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 07:24:46 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Why no penalty this year?  This is not something new.

Mike W0MU

J6M CQ WW DX CW Contest 2011
J6/W0MU November 21 - December 1 2011
W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net


On 11/7/2011 11:58 AM, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * 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>>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>