[CQ-Contest] qrp-declaration...

[Jeffrey Embry]

Chris,

I totally agree.  Most of my contesting is done QRP...with the
exception of when I am at a Multi-op or visting a station.  I have
NEVER added the /QRP to my call.  It just seems to be a waste of
time...and truth be told, I get a kick out of being copied without
using it...especially in a pileup.

-- 

Jeff Embry, K3OQ
FM19je
ARCI #11643, FPQRP #-696,
QRP-L # 67, NAQCC #25, ARS #1733
AMSAT LM-2263

On the web at http://k3oq.net


--
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message, however a large
number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 11:47 AM, DL8MBS <prickler.schneider at t-online.de> wrote:
> If detecting cheaters by monitoring stations is an aim (a good one I
>  think) why not better add a power designator to the exchange like H, L,
>  Q (RDXA already being a contest with a REAL exchange)? It is only one
>  additional character and sent by EVERY station - not coming out of the
>  blue like every 23rd station being qrp and sending something cryptic
>  with a slash.
>
>  I do some QRP-contesting and it would take an armed man in my shack to
>  make me send an additional /qrp - if it were allowed in DL and not
>  making me multi-op ;-)  I´m thankful for every guy on the other end
>  taking the time for more than one request about call and serial number.
>  Should I also torture him with guessing what´s behind the slash? IMHO NO.
>
>  But: RDXC is a great contest!
>
>  Only my two eurocents.
>  73, Chris
>
>  (www.dl8mbs.de)
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  CQ-Contest mailing list
>  CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>  http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>