[CQ-Contest] Did I cheat in NAQP CW?

[ve4xt at mts.net]

Well, with all due respect to my fellow SS QST author Steve, I think it might be unreasonable to impose 
on operators a duty to control what others may do.

To take Steve's example a step further, what if I'm calling CQ (not a selective CQ but just a CQ) and a 
well-intentioned but misguided Good Samaritan who knows, say, that VY1 is a rare section, mentions 
out of the blue "hey, did you know J was on 14210?"?

Am I expected to reclassify myself as U? I think not. I can't control what this guy did. And, it's 
something I heard, myself, on the air and on frequencies permitted by the rules. I did not solicit the 
information. This was not an "operating arrangement". It was just a happenstance. The info is fair game.

If I call "CQ RI", am I soliciting those not in RI to tell me where RI is? That's debatable, but really, I'm 
soliciting a QSO with someone in RI. Fair game, AFAIC.

One thing that seems to me to be a reality check here: an operator who feels the need to call selective 
CQs isn't going to win. Chances are, such an op isn't really even going to be competitive, particularly in 
SS, with so few multipliers. Rate is key to SS, and with rate, come the mults. I would suggest that the 
operators who fixate on a sweep (and nothing wrong with just wanting a sweep), resort to selective CQs 
because they fear they may not be on long enough or work enough guys that the mults just happen.

YMMV at 8:30 p.m. on Sunday with one section left to go, but generally, the ops who place competitive 
scores in SS do so by just calling CQ, maxing out rate and letting the mults come.

73, kelly
ve4xt

> 
> From: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu at w0mu.com>
> Date: 2010/01/12 Tue PM 06:36:56 CST
> To: "'CQ Contest'" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Did I cheat in NAQP CW?
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, selective calling can lead to all kinds of single-op issues,
> such as...
> 
> "Hey Dick, a Rhode Island station is on 14210"
> 
> and innocent DX spots, made by others, like:
> 
> DX de W2XYZ: 14320.0 W7ZR Looking for Rhode Island
> 
> Best to simply not do it, and avoid the scorn of your peers.
> 
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
> 
> 
> While this *MAY* create circumstances that might be considered by some to be
> questionable, it *MAY* not.  This same reasoning could be applied to nearly
> everything we do.  By driving a car you are more likely to be involved in an
> auto accident, so it would be best not to do that.  At some point common
> sense and your conscious need to take over and decide what works for you.
> 
> The fact that Joe spotted my need for RI does not necessarily mean that RI
> worked me.  Some stations seem to have a plethora or packet cheerleaders
> while others have none.  There is no way to stop cheerleaders is there?
> What generally happens to me is that I need a mult for the longest time and
> then once I work it, 3 more wander by in the next hour.  Chances might also
> be good that you may run across the 14.210 station while S&Ping or with the
> 2nd vfo etc.  If you run right over to 210 then I think that is wrong.
> There is no guarantee that you will hear or work the station if it is still
> there though. 
> 
> Scorn?  I thought we did this for fun too?  Man getting old sucks, we turn
> into grumpy old farts!  
> 
> Mike W0MU
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>