[CQ-Contest] SIGNING CALLS

[John T. Laney, III]

Dave Lawley wrote:
> 
> I agree that on the whole, it is better to sign your call after each QSO.
> Few would disagree that the strategies suggested by Dick N6AA can
> help to squeeze a few more Qs, or some more valuable Qs, out of the
> pileup. What we all object to are the imbeciles that 'run' for minutes on
> end without signing their calls. IMHO they deserve all they get in terms
> of dups and UR CALL? slowing them down.
> 
> Does anyone know why so many people send TU ? Maybe you think it
> is more polite than R but it takes a bit longer to send, and what we're
> talking about here is efficiency in making Qs. I catch myself sending
> TU sometimes, but only because everyone else seems to do it. When
> I am concentrating on running a pileup (a rare enough thing from
> G-land) I use  R  or if the pile gets really busy, just send my callsign as
> the invitation for the next call.
> 
> Dave G4BUO
> 
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.comHI Dave:  I prefer TU as more polite when not in a hurry.  At 8P9Z, I 
have programmed "R 8P9Z" for years.  Some prefer just to send the 
callsign and I may try that this year, but it lends to some confusion 
for the guy who gets through on the first call and can't figure out 
whether he was acknowledged or not.  I'd hate for him to scratch me from 
the log when he hears neither R nor TU.  I agree with you that R is 
slightly faster than TU and might make a slight difference when making 
6000+ QSOs in 48 hours.  73, John, K4BAI.


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