Tangly indeed.
To avoid the NIL problem, it’s probably best not to work them. That said, my
guess (and only a guess) is that the added QSO count from working them is a
wash against others that later remove the QSOs.
73, John, K1AR
PS: On a positive note, take notice that we have already received over 8000
logs from last weekend’s WW!
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 28, 2025, at 1:59 PM, Dave G. ve3kg@myrac.ca
> <goodwindave.73@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> John K1AR said:
>
> “Yes, we only remove the offender's QSO, NOT both. We don't expect ops to
> adjudicate OOB QSOs in real-time on the receiving side.”
>
> Great! That seems like good judgement by the adjudicators. But they are
> missing another aspect:
>
> When I get OOB callers from the US, I often tell them “you’re outside the
> US phone band.” The usual response is silence, but more than a few delete
> the QSO from their logs. In adjudication, I get assessed a penalty for
> “NOT IN LOG” QSOs, even though I worked the station.
>
> So, should I work the OOB Yanks, and say nothing? Should I refuse to log
> the OOB Yanks? Their repeated calls get annoying, sometimes quite
> desperate and often a source of QRM.
>
> This is tangly stuff.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave VE3KG
> (At VE3VN this past weekend)
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|