[CQ-Contest] Little Gun Dilemma: Callsign not acknowledged

Bill at ng3k.com Bill at ng3k.com
Wed Feb 20 05:50:36 EST 2002

On 19 Feb 2002 at 12:22, Bill at ng3k.com wrote:

> ARRL DX CW Exchange:
> 1  he: test big0gun
> 2  me: ng3k
> 3  he: ng3 599 kw
> 4  me: tu ng3k 599 md
> 5  he: r big0gun test
> This is indeed the argument for:
> 4  me: ng3k

Thanks to everyone for their responses.  Not surprisingly,
not everyone sees this the same way.  I am very much
persuaded by VK5GN's argument for a "joint responsibilty"
between the caller and the called though.  In the 
foregoing exchange, if the big0run gets my call wrong, 
he's penalized.  If I get his call wrong, I'm penalized.  
All's well with the world.

On the other hand, if big0gun says,

  3  he: ng3

I will reply,

  4. me: ng3k

This leaves the conduct of the exchange in big0gun's 
control.  If he wants me the send the exchange at (4), he 
sends his exchange at (3).  If he wants to get my callsign 
confirmed before going on, he sends only my partial 
callsign at (3).

If the exchange transpires as originally postulated, I 
will assume that big0gun has his act together and has
copied my callsign correctly.



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