Not trying to get a “heated” exchange going again. But I would like some
stations to ID more often. But now regretting making any comment at all about
stations that do not ID. Or my practice of giving out NILs now and then, But
still no call, no Q, can't leave the callsign field blank
KK9A said: So you worked the station and then remove the QSO from your log
because you did not copy all of the necessary information? (not all of the
necessary information was sent) That is a terrible operating practice! It would
be a much better to ask for the callsign during your report - just before you
send your report. I have never seen anyone refuse to ID when asked this way.
I have. I have sent “cl?” then finished the exchange only to have the other
station not ID send “tu” and move on to the next Q. Expecting me to wait I
guess.
BTW, It is impossible to copy what is not being sent, so if the other station
doesn’t ID, there is not much you can do about it
What was it rule 5: don’t call without knowing the callsign of the other
station. That means passing by a lot of stations. I can do that
I don’t like losing a Q or giving out a nil, but John IDing is required by the
sending station too isn’t it? Yes? No?
Doesn’t the non-IDing station need to follow the contest rules too? And also
the rules of his country?
Does anyone accept not IDing as a good operating practice?
Also, I have heard some non-assisted stations complete QSOs with the non-IDer
and then not ask for the callsign. Which I find curious. I operate without
assistance so I actually have to hear a call sign in order to log it.
Not IDing may be best way to promote operating assisted or using skimmer, an
advertising tactic so to speak, force people to use assistance in order to get
callsigns. hmmmmm .... no still not interested in doing that.
73 Scott W2LC
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|