[CQ-Contest] unIDs

[Yuri]

Looks like this thread appears annually after each CQ WW CW Contest.

It reminds me exactly of a "pedestrian-driver" situation.

If the guy is a pedestrian, he would complain on "those fast and dangerous" 
cars, but as soon as he becomes a car driver, his thinking changes towards 
blaming "slow and irresponsible" pedestrians.

73  Yuri  VE3DZ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw at verizon.net>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] unIDs


> If you don't know who they are, don't call them.
>
> If, as a S&P station, you don't want to wait for an ID, move on to work
> someone else.
>
> Some stations ID after every contact.  Some after every other.  Some every
> minute.  Some less often.  This is nothing new; this goes back as far as I
> can recall, and that goes back to Field Day 1972.
>
> Unless you are going to mandate in the rules a minimum time to ID over &
> above what is legally required by the country of license for the station,
> there's not much that can be done about it.
>
> 73
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Doug Smith
> Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 7:30 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] unIDs
>
> (a term from the broadcast DX world used to refer to stations you hear 
> that
> are probably good DX but can't be identified.  Of course, the FCC
> broadcasting regulations only require stations to give their callsigns 
> once
> an hour, and while the Communications Act doesn't require it, Murphy's Law
> requires the signal fade during the identification announcement...)
>
>
> Unfortunately there were far too many unIDs in this weekend's CQ WW CW. 
> You
> don't have to ID after *every* QSO#, but having to wait 60-120 seconds
> for an ID is simply not acceptable.##  Being the S&P side of a QSO does 
> not
> constitute permission for the run side to waste my time; isn't that kinda
> the ham radio equivalent of saving time in a Formula 1 race by having your
> crew barricade the track so you can refuel in your lane & don't have to
> enter the pits?  So what if it slows down the other competitors?, it's
> faster for ME.
>
> After years of declining dupe rates, (due to computer logging, resulting 
> in
> much faster & more accurate dupe checking)  I sense the dupe total is
> climbing again.  One major Caribbean DXpedition worked me three times on 
> the
> same band -- because they weren't IDing with reasonable frequency & I
> wasn't sure they weren't a needed mult.  A couple of dozen other stations
> also ended up getting duped.  (I find it interesting to note that there is
> not a single JA or VE station among the offenders)  There are also at 
> least
> three stations that are going to get a N.I.L., as the S&P rates were too
> high to justify sitting around 1-3 minutes waiting for an ID from someone
> who probably wasn't a mult.
>
>
> It's my impression this problem was a LOT worse in the CW contest than it
> was on phone last month.
>
> -- 
>
> Doug Smith W9WI
> Pleasant View, TN  EM66
>
> # although it would be nice, and many of the best operators were doing so.
> ## unless it's taking that long to complete a single QSO, which DOES
> occasionally happen.
> _______________________________________________