Please note that the rules DO NOT REQUIRE anyone sending any callsigns.
Rules do not differentiate in any way between RUN and S&P station as to how
a QSO should be handled and which jargon or procedure should be used.
The only thing the rules say is: "the call sign sent by an entrant during a
completed exchange, must be logged as sent by the entrant."
That means if you send a callsign then you have to log it as sent. It does
not matter if you are RUN or S&P.
RUN station is totally allowed to not say the call if it is not needed. For
example I can answer a friend by his name or I can come back to "who was the
YL station (meaning female), you are 59 15" and just end the QSO with Thank
You or 88.
There are many other scenarios where the RUN station is not giving the call
or full call. Please don't interpret the Rules in the way what is not
written there.
But coming back to an earlier letter by VE3DZ where he was joking that
sending DL76A on hand key instead of DL7BA and not correcting it means he
has to log DL76A, then yes. It is true. If he is not correcting it
immidiately in the QSO and logs DL7BA then he is looking at possible Yellow
Card.
73
Tonno
ES5TV
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Chuck
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 7:30 AM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Rule Changes
I don't see where the new rule requires anything but a running station to
say the call he is logging. You are reading too much into this. All run
stations should do this anyway, because the calling station can correct them
if the call is wrong. If you don't say the calling station's call, how is
the pileup to know who you are coming back to?
Chuck W5PR
-----Original Message-----
From: David Gilbert
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:43 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Rule Changes
I'm not sure where you get the impression that both stations sending
both callsigns represents efficient communication. It doesn't. The
only reason it might facilitate your net activities is that nets today
are not trying to pass messages at hundred per hour rates, and I
guarantee that 99% of contesters are not contesting because they think
it will hone their net skills.
73,
Dave AB7E
On 10/16/2012 5:15 AM, Charles Harpole wrote:
> Hurray for Randy and the CQ Contest Committee for finally facing the shady
> ways contesters have used to artificially raise their scores. The best
> reasons for contesting is that is sharpens skills in passing messages
> completely and accurately. I know my contesting helped me in running the
> Hurricane Watch Net.
>
> Hurray for insisting that every contact contains both call signs on BOTH
> ends of the QSO. Now maybe I will not have to wait hours for some "rapid
> runner" to i.d. Too, it used to be that the FCC REQUIRED stations in
> contact to identify both themselves and the station they are in QSO with.
> This helped regulatory monitoring but was dropped in favor of only self
> identifying.... maybe about the time when FCC monitoring faded away. I
> can
> see this rule assists the new Contest Committee monitoring, hee hee.
>
> I was a ham for 30 years before I even heard of these ways of
> cheating/shading. . Boy, was I innocent, and wondered how I scored so
> low! About that time, I learned of the practice of DX "insurance
> contacts"
> too.
>
> 73, Charly
>
> PS, Dont forget to thank ARRL for taking the lead in these matters...
> wait,
> skip that.... ARRL does not even publish everyone's scores in QST.
>
>
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|