[CQ-Contest] "Worked Before" stupidities

[John Devoldere ON4UN]

At 13:42 1/6/98 -0400, you wrote:
>HNY to all,
>
> I guess I've been out of the list in the previous discussions of
>WKDB4, Im in total favor of just work the guy and let the computer
>figure it out. But that brings and interesting point to the situation:
>
>1. Does it really help you in the score to work somebody when the
>   station after the contest will remove dupes.

It is obvious that one should NEVER remove dupes from the log. The program
will give zero points, which is all that has to be done!


>2. I know of many people that they will send the report and not log you
>at all.
>

This is stupid, unfair and unsportmanslike. 

>3. When the contest comitee reviews the log and finds those one way qsos
>   do they take that one out?.
>
>   a. Does the comitee confirms qsos via bin check or if times are
>      different they will eliminate the qso?

If both QSO's are in thelog (the original "one way" and the so-called dupe
(two way), than I assume that the CQ log checking programs are smart enough
to find the second one. In thia case the second one should be good for
points, while the first one (in one log) should be zero points. 

>   b. Do they understand that if Im in somebody's log that doesnt
>mean        that they are in mine? 
>

I am sure "they" know that. K3EST and his helping hands are very
professional abot this, and I am sure they do the right thing. It would be
nice if Bill would comment on this though.

> I have many other Questions regarding this matter, that trouble me
> everytime that somebody tell's me, "worked before" and they are not in
> my log. Is it them? is it us? who screwed up?
>
> After writing this email I thing there are simple options.
>
> 1. Do not remove dupes.

CORRECT

> 2. convince the station to remove the first qso(one way)
>    mark the qso as the good one and remove the original after the test.

IDEAL

> 3. Be lazy and just think of at as a lost one.
>
THAT'S NOT LIKE ME....

> Finally I dont think of it as stupidities, since I would have to 
>consider myself stupid too, but as a serious matter that needs 
>attention, taking into consideration that lately, these encounters
> with simple problems are less common, since machines have so much to
> say in our hobby.
>

What I consider stupid is that one says "QSO B4" and refuses another one,
although I tell him that the QSO in his log is NOT a QSO. If he inisits it
is, knowing that he is not in my log, than he is plain stupid... 

73


John, ON4UN
>
> 73's
>
> Felipe Hernandez
> NP4Z
>
> Puerto Rico Contest Club KP3Z
> Pobox 193660
> San Juan, PR 00919
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>John Devoldere (ON4UN) wrote:
>> 
>> I get very excited when someone, be it on CW, Phone or RTTY comes back to
>> my calls and sends "Worked Before"... Well, If he would be in my log, I
>> would not call him! I know this has been discussed before, and most, after
>> having explained that "they" are not in "our" log, give me "another"
report.
>> 
>> Some profer to argue for 5 minutes instead of giving a report which takes
>> 10 seconds...
>> 
>> The worst experience I recall was this weekend in the ARRL RTTY Roundup
>> with CT4NH who flatly kept refusing to gives us a report, because "WKD
>> B4"... He and we must have lost at least 10 minutes in this thing, but he
>> refused to give us "another" report...
>> 
>> Are some people so "st..." that they don't understand that because someone
>> is in their log, it not neccesarily means that "they" are in "our" log...
>> 
>> I get excited everytime someone refuses "another" QSO.
>> 
>> When someone calls us who's already in our log, we just work him. That
>> fair, fast and smart. The computer program will indicate it as a dupe.
>> Everybody is happy.
>> 
>> 73
>> 
>> John, ON4UN
>
>--
>
>
>
>--
>CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
>Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
>
>
***************************************************************
*            John Devoldere, ON4UN, AA4OI, OT8T               *
*             e-mail: john.devoldere at innet.be                 *
*                address: Poelstraat 215                      *  
*                         B9820 Merelbele                     * 
*                         Belgium                             *
*                 mailing addres: P.O.Box 41                  *  
*                                 B9000 Gent,                 *
*                                 Belgium                     *
***************************************************************
*                                                             *
      
*  PLEASE CALL US IN THE CONTESTS (ON4UN OR OT8T). THANK YOU! *
*                                                             *
***************************************************************   


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com