[CQ-Contest] Station not giving a check or section

[Rick Tavan N6XI]

The station in question often gave out partial exchanges. He didn't utter
the phrase "Puerto Rico" on every QSO but he did say it while I was
listening. He also gave out two years a couple times while I was in the
pileup. When I worked him, I asked explicitly for the year he was first
licensed and he replied "x or x+1; I don't remember." I logged one of those
years since my logging program doesn't provide fuzzy data entry. Others may
log the other. I doubt he will submit a log. I doubt the log checker DQs a
QSO if the call is non-unique and others logged a different year. Who's to
judge in such a case? Of course if he does submit a log claiming one of
those years, those who logged the other year will lose. Fortunately for me,
I worked another KP4.

/Rick N6XI

On 11/21/08, Felipe J Hernandez <fhdez at islandnetjm.com> wrote:
>
> Maybe someone else can confirm that indeed he wasnt giving the whole
> exchange.
> Im sure that opinions from people that really listened to him would be more
> meaningful than mine.
>
> Felipe
> NP4Z
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Professional Home Inspections
>   To: 'Felipe J Hernandez' ; 'I H' ; cq-contest at contesting.com
>   Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 9:44 AM
>   Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Station not giving a check or section
>
>
>   I am sure the log checking software does not take into account "good
>   intentions"
>   Other rare sections stations didn't need to work split when the piles
> were
>   so crazy in order to not be covered by the QRM of the callers and we all
> had
>   to listen for QRP's and VE's. Do you think he was the only station with
>   pile-ups?
>   He didn't send the required contest exchange correctly, the contacts
> should
>   not count. Period.
>   If the ARRL lets this go, guess what will happen next time?
>   The rules state - NO CHECK, NO SECTION = NO QSO.
>   If we missed any part of the receiving stations exchange, we told the
>   station, NO QSO, please try later. We did not log a partial QSO.
>
>   Paul K2DB @ K2NNY
>
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: Felipe J Hernandez [mailto:fhdez at islandnetjm.com]
>   Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 10:08 AM
>   To: I H; cq-contest at contesting.com
>   Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Station not giving a check or section
>
>   THere where only 2 or 3 kp4's active.
>   I was one of them, I suspect that maybe trying to save time he cut it
> short,
>   the piles were so crazy
>   that we had to work split in order not to be covered by the QRM of the
>   callers..
>   It was difficult since I had to listen for QRP's and VE's to give the
>   opportunity to as many guys in all classes.
>
>   If my testimonial helps in any way there was a logical explanation of
> what
>   you heard, Im sure that he gave the rest of the information maybe not all
>   the time but Im sure that everyone that worked him got the whole thing
>   otherwise the software wouldhave not logged the entry.
>
>   Perhaps the ARRL can understand the good intentions...
>
>
>   Felipe
>   NP4Z
>
>
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: I H
>     To: cq-contest at contesting.com
>     Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 1:32 PM
>     Subject: [CQ-Contest] Station not giving a check or section
>
>
>
>     During SS phone last weekend I heard a KP4 sending only his serial
> number
>   and precedent. He didn't give a check or section. Will it be counted as a
>   valid qso? If it isn't, I wonder how many will miss the sweep because of
> it.
>
>     There were a lot of guys needing the PR section when he showed up on
> 20M
>   late Sunday afternoon, so the pile up was pretty big. I chose not to try
> and
>   work the guy and took a chance on finding another one later in the
> contest.
>   I got lucky and worked PR with less than a half hour left Sunday evening
> for
>   the sweep.
>
>     So what do you guys think, should it be counted or not?
>
>     Ian - K8MM
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     CQ-Contest mailing list
>     CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>     http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>   _______________________________________________
>   CQ-Contest mailing list
>   CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>   http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>