I will preface this by saying that I don't think a rule change is needed
here. At least among non-phone contests, and assuming no constraints on
where to operate, there's plenty of space for anyone who wants to run to
run. Admittedly, much of this space may not be considered prime contesting
territory...but that's part of the game, isn't it?
With that aside, if a contest organizer *really* felt a need to promote
churn for run frequencies without becoming a sprint, a better way might be:
* Mandatory QSY for a running station if no contacts are made on that
frequency (or +/-1 kHz, as measured using whole kHz reported in the logs)
within # minutes. (If a running station is able to hold the frequency and
make use of it, then there should be no perceived need to force them to
give up the frequency.)
* After QSYing from a run frequency, a station must move at least # kHz,
and may not return to a prior run frequency until they have made # contacts
elsewhere, and until # minutes have elapsed. (Go S&P or run elsewhere for
long enough to give others a fighting chance to make use of the prior run
frequency.)
...and some other rules would be needed maintain the spirit of the two
points above when considering M/M, SO2R, or SO2V operation.
The "#" value placeholders above do not necessarily need to be the same
number; I just didn't feel like suggesting specific values.
Now, I'll admit that I doubt the guidelines I've suggested will have that
big an impact, since I assume that most serious competitors will already
QSY and hunt elsewhere if they aren't maintaining rate. What this might
achieve is prohibiting the strategy of using automated CQ's to hold a prime
frequency while having lunch, or working another band. Such activity
happens, and is annoying....but is it so much of a problem that there's a
need to create new rules (and new challenges in enforcing the rules)?
Again, I don't think there's a need to change rules to address this. But
if the rules are going to change, don't change them in such a way that
running stations have to abort a good run because of an artificial time
limit (assuming the contest isn't a sprint).
I'll repeat a suggestion I've made previously: if there is a perceived need
to legislate good behavior or particular operating practices (perhaps
including "leave space for the little pistols to run"), consider developing
a Constester Code of Conduct, which contest organizers may or may not
incorporate by reference into their rules as they wish.
--
*Michael D. Adams* (N1EN)
Poquonock, Connecticut | mda@n1en.org
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:36 AM, Art Boyars <artboyars@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Once a station is required to QSY, that station is not allowed to make
> another QSO on the vacated frequency until or unless at least one
> subsequent QSO is made on a new frequency."
>
> This means that you may not bounce back and forth between two CQ freq's,
> right? Rather, each time you leave a freq, before you come back and call
> CQ -- or even answer a CQ -- on that freq you have to >>verify << (how???)
> that somebody else has made a QSO on that freq.
>
> Is that how it's played?
>
> 73, Art K3KU
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|