[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Your Call?

To: Drew Vonada-Smith <drew@whisperingwoods.org>, cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Your Call?
From: Tom Carrubba KA2D <ka2d@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 05:28:02 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Simple solution. Don't work them!
I usually S&P and get decent rate going, I will not work a station who does not ID in a timely manner.
Sure, it diminishes my score but it also affects theirs..

So, no ID, no qso

73 -Tom KA2D

-----Original Message----- From: Drew Vonada-Smith
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 6:14 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Your Call?


Key clicks and GJ0KE were indeed annoying this contest. But what drove me nuts, and I am surprised not to be reading it from others yet, was the "No ID while running" situation. ***It has gotten much worse***. The practice seems to be most evident in SA and the Caribbean.

I heard *many* stations not IDing for a dozen QSOs. I heard one not ID for over 15 minutes - I felt compelled to stay there and measure it. This destroys the rate of people doing unassisted S&P. Many good contesters in the Caribbean make great rates and ID every or nearly every QSO. So this practice is a way to improve your rate by a tiny fraction at the cost of a HUGE impact on others. This is not within the spirit or rules of any contest. It is poor sportsmanship at best.

To make it worse, a few stations (and I will name names from my notes if asked) refused a fill even when working a station asking "Call?" And I heard one pointedly answered "NO" when a dozen in the pileup repeatedly asked for "CALL?" This isn't just bad practice, it is spitting in the face of others who operate skillfully.

I've actually had contesters tell me proudly how efficient they were because after each QSO in a big run, they skip the TU and their call and just send a dit. We need to change this mindset.

Perhaps no rule changes are needed. But I call upon all of you to join in publicly noting that this isn't acceptable. And I call upon sponsors to get tough on abusers. If no reasonable attitude is forthcoming, the solution is to require a callsign every QSO. That may be seen by some as "extreme", but IMHO, this is best practice in any case.

73, Drew K3PA

CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list

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