[CQ-Contest] ETHICS

[Dick Green WC1M]

I think most of your analysis is correct, but your identification of each
station's license class may not be correct. Per my previous post, you can't
determine the operating privileges of a US contest participant from the call
sign. The FCC rules allow the person operating the radio to use the
privileges of the "control operator", who doesn't have to be the person who
owns the call sign being used. It can be one of the other operators or just
a person standing around in the room. I'm sure in most cases the call sign
being used is that of the control operator, but not always.

I think the reason for the high percentage of Extra class contacts is that
US contesters have strong incentive to get our Extra class license so we can
work the entire US band allocation. In other words, I think you'll find that
a high percentage of US participants are Extra class licensees.

73, Dick WC1M

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tonno Vahk [mailto:tonno.vahk at mail.ee]
> Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 3:43 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ETHICS
> 
> I think US stations are extremely ethical, at least compared to EU, don't
> know how the comparison to VE would look like:)
> 
> I did interesting statistics on ES5RR ARRL DX CW SOAB operation from my
> station. He worked 797 US Qs on 20m and 304 of those on frequencies below
> 14025. I was curious as to how much he lost because others than Extras
could
> not call him at that time. How many of the other categories where around
> anyway and how well did they obey band plan?
> 
> Well, the answers are:
> 
> He worked
> 
> Extra 734 (92.4%)
> Advanced 15 (1.9%)
> General 25 (3.2%)
> Technician 2 (0.3%)
> Club Stations 18 (2.3%)
> 
> BUT ALL QSOs BELOW 14025 WHERE WITH EXTRAS ONLY!!
> 
> Even though the share of Extras is extremely high, still nobody else
called
> him below 14025. I could also conclude based on the amount of other
> categories worked above 14025 that he would have maybe worked ca 25 more
> QSOs by staying above 14025 all the time.
> 
> If in this contest (CW and not so good propagation) the share of extras
> calling in was very high then in other situation like ES5TV WAE SSB I had
> about 1000 US QSOs on 20m and 8.3% Advanced and 32.1% General out of it.
Of
> course I stayed above 14225 and you can see that it is possible to lose
> nearly HALF of your QSOs by sticking too low.
> 
> 73
> Tonno
> ES5TV
> 
> P.s. naturally I think that it is by no means the responsibility of the CQ
> station to know if the caller is out of band or not.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Don Cassel
> Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 9:33 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ETHICS
> 
> I agree. It's not uncommon to be called by a U.S. station when running
below
> 14150. My responsibility is to be sure I am operating within the bounds of
> my license not to check whether anyone else is. The U.S. or any other
caller
> is responsible to be sure they are operating within the bounds of their
> license. So if I work anyone when I am on 14.140 them I am legal and
> ethical. It's not my responsibility to police the one out of bounds.
> 
> Chad's example of working on 14153 would also apply to a U.S. Extra class.
> Do these guys check to see if all U.S. callers are appropriately licensed
to
> be calling in on that frequency. Again, it is the responsibility of the
> calling station not the one doing the running.
> 
> 73, Don VE3XD
> 
> > This brings up an interesting point.  Is it really the VE's
responsibility
> > to know that every answer to his CQs is within their band or license
> class?
> > Sure, this example is a little easier, knowing that US hams can't go
below
> > 14150, but what if he was on 14153 and a US general class licensee call
> > him?  Should he quickly evaluate every caller to see if they are
approved
> to
> > operate on 14153?  If you say "of course not", I ask you, what's the
> > difference? In either case, the US ham is operating beyond their license
> > class.  Why is it the VE's responsibility to police him if under 14150
and
> > not at 14153?
> >
> > Chad WE9V
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>