[CQ-Contest] call sign in contests

Nat Heatwole heatwole at clark.net
Sun Feb 11 19:10:31 EST 2001

Wait a minute. KC5AJX sends a very well thought out post to the reflector
that's filled with many very legitimate questions in an attempt to gain some
answers and you (Leigh Jones):

1. Practically curse him for not loving CW to the degree that you believe he
2. Make fun of his call citing that it is unattractive, long, and
forgettable and state that it's sounds abominable on CW and that the
phonetics are just as bad.
3. Apologize to him in a condescending manner that he was not able to have a
1X3 assigned to him when he upgraded above tech.
4. Ruin his hopes of finding a 1X2 call.
5. State that he must change his present call to do contesting a favor.
6. State that his current contest scores are disappointing and that they
always will be.

Not to mentions NO WHERE in your reply did you offer any solid, cohesive
answer to ANY of his questions. Meaning that your post merely takes up
reflector bandwidth and doesn't contribute to the thread in any positive
way. It this really the goal of the CQ-Contest reflector?

Nat, WZ3AR

 > Don't consider upgrading to extra class.  Just do it.
 > I'm sorry.  To some, the code seems an antiquated, slow, almost utterly
 > useless exercise in futility.  To others, it's beautiful music.  To me,
 > modes are beautiful music.  However, one can make beautiful music with
 > voice alone, but a great deal of the finest music would be very empty
 > if it were reduced to the human voice unsupported by musical instruments.
 > Try to imagine all of your favorite music -- from rock and roll to
 > classical -- being performed vocally without the support of musical
 > instruments.
 > My own life would seem as empty without the code.  Certainly the code
 > requires time and effort to learn, and just as certainly the code does not
 > become fine music if the required time and effort has not been invested.
 > is the same as learning to play a musical instrument to add to the music
 > one's voice.  At first, the time and effort may seem unrewarding and the
 > results may be disappointing.  But, with sufficient investment of time and
 > effort learning, the music becomes its own reward and the task of learning
 > gives way to the effortless pleasure of the performance.
 > I enjoy the virtuoso vocal performance, with or without instrumental
 > back-up.  But after 48 hours in a chair wearing headsets a CW contest
 > sounds like a symphony to me, while some phone contests will seem to
 > degenerate into angry riots before the end due to my personal level of
 > operator fatigue.  It's a much more strenuous physical effort to yell into
 > microphone very fast than it is to diddle a paddle.  And copying CW
 > interference is relatively easy and less anger inducing by comparison to
 > phone.
 > I'm sorry.  A Technician class or higher is customarily privileged to a
 > license or similar.  Your callsign is not merely long, it is unattractive
 > and forgettable.  It's an abominable callsign to send in code, and the
 > phonetics are nearly as bad.  If you'd like to do contesting, you owe it
 > yourself to everything possible to change it.  Otherwise, your scores will
 > be forever disappointing.  Don't count on getting a 1X2 right away -- they
 > will probably be all gone.  For phone contests, you deserve to treat
 > yourself to a memorable callsign with poetry in phonetics.  Choose a good
 > one.
 > Why?  Is it possible to be first beautiful and then ugly in rapid
 > succession?  Of course!  Many women have made a career of this.

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

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list