[CQ-Contest] Put nothing but the correct callsign - but CT
is smart enuff to figure out
Richard L. King
k5na at texas.net
Thu Jun 10 17:41:57 EDT 1999
This can be a real can of worms.
When I had a station in New York it was during many of the years while the
CQWW still required my station (which was outside of my original callsign
district) to sign my call as "K5NA portable 2".
I have hundreds of SSB QSL cards from those contests that are made out to
"K5NA/P2". Exactly what you say is what some people log. It sounds like
N6AA would remove all those QSOs from whatever log he finds them in.
Was I in error saying "portable 2"? Should I have said "slash 2" or "stroke
2"? Then I would probably be getting "K5NA/S2" QSLs?
How do you fix this? I used to think it wasn't a big deal and it didn't
need to be fixed. But now, the log submission rules seem to be changing to
accomodate log analysis. Are we making the log submission rules too
inflexible and could we be discouraging newcomers as a result?
It is certainly possible, in my opinion, to have a log entry that is
technically correct but isn't entered EXACTLY as the log checking program
wants it to be. Maybe our log checking programs should be programed to be
smarter than they are now.
And finally, I would like to see the rules for accurate log-entries clearly
stated in the CQWW rules and not just as a reflector comment from a CQWW
At 09:41 AM 6/10/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Why is the checking program not able to cope with /QRP when CT correctly
>scores this? Seems like JE1CKA is correct that it is unfair to penalize
>the contester who properly records what was sent as part of the callsign.
>Terry Zivney, N4TZ/9
>n4tz at arrl.net
>CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
>Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest