[CQ-Contest] A QSO or not a QSO

[George Fremin III - K5TR]

On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 08:55:54PM -0400, Guy Olinger, K2AV wrote:
> comparing viewpoints. I have noted points of community schizophrenia on
> some issues. For starters, from the *same specific* posters, some number
> of times:
> 

Since I know I have commented on these issues several times
with almost the same answer I might be one of the people you are 
refering to.


> <> 1) If it's not a QSO then don't log it. A QSO must be acknowledged,
> "two way, period".

I have said the above.  If you feel you made a QSO you should 
log it - if you are not sure you should find a way to 
be sure enough that you feel you can claim the QSO.
None of the major contests I know of have a way to log / count 
partial QSOs.


> <> 2) Support for penalties only on the receiving end when mistakes are
> logged.

I have pointed out that in contests I have talked about that 
the scoring is such that it is the receiving that is checked
since checking the transmitting it not done.  

I have not expressed support nor contempt for this fact - I have just
pointed out how the logs are scored.

> 
> If QSO's are "two way, period", then shouldn't penalties be "two way,
> period".

Maybe - but this really is not what I was addressing.


> 
> Two-way is two-way, isn't it? If we really want a TWO-WAY contest,
> shouldn't the credit or lack thereof be two-way as well? Shouldn't the
> scoring philosophy revolve around two-way completion and not just give
> it lip service when attempting to justify some aspect of the
> rules/scoring?
> 

Maybe.


> If a station otherwise intent on run rate at any cost knew that not
> managing the acknowledgements would COST HIM AS WELL, would we not start
> to hear some attention to the little guy's "R" or lack thereof?

It already does - if the stations you are working are not clear 
on the fact that you are working them or getting the information 
correctly than you stand the chance of them not logging
the QSO because they do not think it happened.  This results in
a not in log.

> I HEAR two-way

You should log QSOs you think occured - QSOs you think were two way.

>, but it's SCORED one-way.

This is just a fact of the way the major contests are scored.

> 
> Which is it?

It is both.

Should there be some way to check for tranmit errors - maybe but that
is anohter subject.



-- 

George Fremin III                 
Johnson City, Texas             "Experiment trumps theory." 
K5TR (ex.WB5VZL)                            -- Dave Leeson W6NL
geoiii at kkn.net                             
830-868-2510                      
http://www.kkn.net/~k5tr                   


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