The problem goes in cycles. It is getting worse at the moment. There will
be some backlash as a result of discussion. The situation will improve
some for awhile and then get worse again if it follows history.
I did hear a number of stations that didn't sign very often tell several
stations
"QSO B4".
73, Larry W6NWS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 4:18 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] unIDs
> On 28/11/2011 02:44, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
>
>> Some stations ID after every contact. Some after every other. Some
>> every
>> minute. Some less often. This is nothing new; this goes back as far as
>> I
>> can recall, and that goes back to Field Day 1972.
>
> The problem is recent, and getting worse. It stems from
> those stations assuming everyone else knows their call
> from spots or the RBN. For as long as they get a steady
> stream of callers, they have no need to ID. They use
> non-IDing as a form of pileup management.
>
> Of course it's utterly selfish.
>
>
>> Unless you are going to mandate in the rules a minimum time to ID over&
>> above what is legally required by the country of license for the station,
>> there's not much that can be done about it.
>
> Contest organisers can, and do, mandate rules that
> have nothing to do with "legalities". The solution
> is not to set a maximum time between IDs, it might
> be better to specify a maximum number of QSOs, no
> more than three or four, because that is easy to
> monitor.
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|