[CQ-Contest] How frequent to ID? Every QSO? No way!
apr at erichilding.com
Tue Jan 18 15:34:57 EST 2005
Doug, W9WI wrote
> In any case... failing to ID frequently is discourteous to your fellow
> contesters. I wouldn't say that it rises to the level of CQing without
> checking if the frequency is occupied, but IMHO it is a
> less-than-fully-ethical behavior. They have just as much right to
> efficient use of their operating time as you do - they have a right to
> not have to sit there and listen to someone waiting for them to ID.
> (IMHO "frequent" IDing means at least once every three QSOs)
I agree with Doug on this issue...at least one ID per every 3 QSOs is a
fair and reasonable operating etiquette for a DX station in a contest.
George, K5TR wrote:
> The topic of how often to sign one's callsign
> comes up on this list every so often.
> IMHO this post:
> is the defintive comment on this subject.
I have great admiration and respect for Dick, N6AA...one of the best ops
around, to be sure.
However, I believe his assertions leave some open gaps to "gross
misinterpretation" that would perpetuate the mentality of some DX ops that
one ID every 7 to 10 QSOs in a contest is acceptable. Unlike Dick's high
skill level, in most cases I've observed of these non-ID'ing stations, they
also demonstrate significant "Alligator" level skills and 50 percent of the
time can't get a caller's callsign right the first time. That's like a
double whammy time-waster for all the other ops who must sit and wait for
Mystery Man to fess up with his own ID up in addition to having waiting for
all the callsign repeats for him to get his log right.
IMHO, if we didn't have a requirement for vehicle drivers to pass license
tests (which still doesn't guarantee safe driving but certainly must help
to a degree), or didn't have "Maximum Speed" signs posted on roadways
(still no guarantee but a deterrent to many lead-foot drivers), my
suspicions are the accident rates would be substantially higher.
IDing every QSO is admirable (40 years ago this was the norm), but without
some acceptable *numerical* target goal or standard (ENDORSED BY THE
CONTEST SPONSORS THEMSELVES) for an alternative which is fair & reasonable
to all event participants, we will all remain in the same pile of contest
DX station Insufficient-ID manure.
A "definitive" guideline on any matter necessitates a bit more
narrow-tailoring to help reduce the un-resolved problem(s).
Once again, I call on the Contest Sponsors themselves to step up to the
plate and exercise some Leadership in this matter. One additional sentence
for clarification in the even rules won't place an additional major burden
on ink, toner or paper supplies.
More information about the CQ-Contest