[CQ-Contest] Keeping 'em honest

[w5ov at w5ov.com]

Art,

I'm glad this was not as simple as it appeared in your original post.

Given what you said, he may not have logged you at all since you heard no
confirmation from "4Q2OM".

In this scenario, I think your not logging "4Q2OM" is prudent rather than
punitive - in contrast with how you originally described it.

73,

Bob W5OV



> Responding to W5OV (below) --
>
> Not at all, Bob, not at all.  When I say that the DX did not, as far as I
> could tell, acknowledge my report I did NOT mean the typical:
>
> "CQ TEST 4Q2OM"
>       "k3ku"
> "K3KU 5NN41"
>       "5nn05"
> "TU 4Q2OM TEST"  or even   "4Q2OM"   or even   "TU"
>
> In cases like that it's clear that the runner is "acknowledging" by
> continuing the run.
>
> Rather, as a really weak station (and many CQ-Contest subscribers might
> not
> fully understand this), what I get is
> something like this:
>
> "CQ TEST 4Q2OM"
>      "k3ku"
> "K3?"   or   "K3KO?"   or   "U?"
>      "k3ku   k3 k u"
> "K3KA?"
>      "k3ku  k3 k u"
> "K3KU 5NN41"          [BTW, I hv noticed tt other op's can cpy
>                                   my cl much btr nw tt we hv SCP]
>      "5nn05"
>
> [silence]
>
>      "5nn05 5nn05"    [Geez! This is CQ WW.  He has my call.
>                                All he has to do is hear some noise from me
>                                at the appropriate time to "copy" my
> report]
> "... KU 59941"
>      "5nn05 5nn05"
> "... U 5NN41"
>      "5nn05 5nn05"
> "... ST 4Q2OM"
>      "k3ku k3ku"
> "... Q TEST 4Q2OM"
>      "k3ku k3ku"
> "CQ TEST 4Q2OM"
> "CQ TEST 4Q2OM"
>
> Do YOU think he "copied" my report, or even heard me again after he (or
> SCP)
> got my call that first time?  I do not think so.  So I did not log the
> QSO.
> And I do not think he should log it.  So I submit my log just to keep 'em
> honest.
>
> You are welcome to disagree.
>
> And it's a good thing that I can laugh at myself.  Otherwise, after a few
> QSOs like that, contesting would be no fun.
>
> 73, Art K3KU
> " K3KF ? ? "
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 8:01 AM, Bob Naumann <W5OV at w5ov.com> wrote:
>
>> OK Art, so let me see if I understand you correctly...
>>
>> You're submitting your log, with some QSOS intentionally removed,
>> because
>> someone who did not respond how you wanted them to, in order to
>> intentionally stick it to them ("I want them to suffer the penalty")?
>>
>> Wow. I hope this doesn't catch on.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Bob W5OV
>