[CQ-Contest] The Calling Disease

[ve4xt at mymts.net]

I can understand it if you send "K4?" and the station you heard was, say,
K4XYX and my call is WK4Z or VK4ZZ or something. Guaranteed, I'm going to go
back to you.

But if you don't even have K4 in your callsign, shut the H-E-double hockey
sticks up! The WA3 should be embarrassed. He's a LID of the first order.

Maybe we need a new Q signal: QFU!

73, kelly
ve4xt


On 11/28/11 4:53 PM, "Joseph.Giasi" <jpgw2qq at gmail.com> wrote:

> George, I can see the problem from the running station's perspective when an
> op like that WA3 just keeps interfering with making the other contact. I
> remember an SA station in a recent contest who would just keep sending his
> call over and over again - while the DX was calling cq, during the exchanges
> with other stations, endlessly - and as loud as possible. Finally, the DX had
> to work him just to make him go away, like you had to do with that WA3.
> 
> I guess there's no good approach to that kind of situation.
> 
> Joe, W2QQ
> 
> 
> On Nov 28, 2011, at 5:13 PM, George Harlem <george.harlem at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I need to offer an admission.
>> 
>> Like most, I too deplore this ugly habit of some lids.  Running in SS CW
>> earlier this month I was called by a weak station and a very strong station.
>> I went back to the weak station with (not the actual prefixes) "K4?".  The
>> very strong WA3 again came back on top of the K4.  I sent "K4?" again.  Same
>> thing.  Then "K4 K4?".  Again the WA3.  So I worked the WA3 and
>> intentionally failed to log him.  Yes, I let my emotions get the better of
>> me.  Pity that the K4 moved on, but I felt justified.  I'm not sure there is
>> any way to change that WA3's behavior.
>> 
>> George W1EBI
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Joseph.Giasi
>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 12:58 PM
>> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The Calling Disease
>> 
>> But you also have to educate the DX operator who encourages this stupidity
>> by failing to observe good DX practices. As a "little pistol" I have lost
>> count of the number of times I have run into the following scenario:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> After spending 15, 20, 30 minutes or more trying to work the DX (using all
>> of the usual tricks - tail-ending, calling slightly off frequency, trying to
>> time my call to be first one heard, etc) finally:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> DX op - "QQ"
>> 
>> Me - "W2QQ" and my response is drowned out by a bunch of high power stations
>> not one of which has a QQ suffix
>> 
>> DX op - Instead of "only QQ" (which would be good practice) goes ahead and
>> works one of the stations who called over me
>> 
>> Me - "what the f.?" (in my head, not on the air)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So, now, do I continue to try to work this DX or do I move on to someone
>> else? Sometimes after this has happened a couple of times in a contest, I
>> switch off the radio and find another, more satisfying, activity.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> There are some DX ops (maybe even a majority) who will not allow the
>> stations with the calling disease from taking over the pile-up; they will
>> ignore all the other callers and stick with the station they called out
>> until they have completed the contact. I'm sure their run-rate takes a
>> momentary hit, but they have controlled the pile-up and by maintaining order
>> I suspect improve their overall results.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On the other hand, by rewarding those with the calling disease, a DX op
>> merely helps to perpetuate the problem. Of course, it's not a problem for
>> him since he makes a contact whether it was with me or the station that
>> called over me.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So, I think there needs to be education of both the stations with the
>> disease and the DX operators who encourage it.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Joe, W2QQ
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>