[CQ-Contest] Re: CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 25, Issue 28

Bob Henderson bob at cytanet.com.cy
Wed Jan 19 09:15:04 EST 2005

Barry W2UP wrote:
> How about this scenario, using the same "me me me" logic:
> Me: CQ test de W2UP
> DX: W3UP de CT1XXX
> Me: CT1XXX 5995
> DX: TU 59914
> Me: TU
> Note that DX miscopied my call.  Do I have any obligation to correct
> it?  I still get the QSO points because I copied him correctly, but
> he loses this QSO + 3 QSOs for a U+1 busted call.  It would cost me
> several msec to send my call again and I could be making another QSO
> instead of helping DX get my call right.
> See what I mean?

This is exactly the point I tried to make earlier.  Contests are excercises
in communication skills yet the rules place no obligation upon us to
communicate our details correctly, merely to receive the details sent to us.
I stand by my view that a good QSO is one in which both parties communicate
correctly with each other.  Evidence to the contrary should void the QSO for
both parties.

If this were reflected in the rules then correcting errors would become a
common sense activity instead of one requiring unselfish generosity.

Bob, 5B4AGN, P3F

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list