Yes, it is just my opinion, yet I thought it may be worth mentioning.
A QSO is generally accepted to be a two way conversation. If one side
or the other does not have the correct information (Callsign, RST,
exchange, etc.) it can be said the QSO was 'broken' and did not happen
officially. This is the practice of the Russian system of compliance.
Leaving aside for the moment as to whether points should be lost; that
is a matter for the contest committee to decide. Nevertheless, the
question at hand is whether 1/2 a QSO constitutes acceptability for one
side of the exchange and not the other. The same can be said for working
(unknown to the other party) a pirate or another station with an expired
license. If you 'worked the station in good faith' why should you lose
those points?
Does that mean that all stations entering a contest would first have to
register and be verified as legit?
As I see it, these contests can not have it both ways. If your log can't
be trusted unless a call that you worked appears on at least XXX (you
choose the number) other participant's logs, then no calls can be judged
to be valid unless the validity of the parties can first be verified.
Otherwise you run the risk of retroactively disqualifying contacts and
points when verification is done later.
Contesting has fallen into the legalistics of meeting compliances (be it
Cabrillo format, location of the other station, station validity, etc.)
Here's my point: If a station in a contest is not where he claims to be
does that not disqualify (from everyone's log) every single QSO claim
when that is discovered? Of course. (Likewise the pirate, et. cetera, ad
nasium.)
-End of soap box opinion
73 de Phil - N8PS
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|