[CQ-Contest] CQ WW Rule Changes

David Gilbert xdavid at cis-broadband.com
Thu Oct 18 02:10:45 EDT 2012

Chuck, how did you get the idea I was reading too much into anything?  
Mr. Harpole clearly stated he felt that it was cheating for both 
stations not to give both callsigns, and he stated that if they did give 
both callsigns it would sharpen their net skills.  I disagree with both 
comments.  What part of that did you miss?   I wasn't referencing the 
actual rules at all, but of course the running station needs to give the 
calling station's callsign.  I never even implied otherwise.


Dave   AB7E

On 10/17/2012 9:30 PM, Chuck wrote:
> I don't see where the new rule requires anything but a running station 
> to say the call he is logging.  You are reading too much into this.  
> All run stations should do this anyway, because the calling station 
> can correct them if the call is wrong. If you don't say the calling 
> station's call, how is the pileup to know who you are coming back to?
> Chuck W5PR
> -----Original Message----- From: David Gilbert
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:43 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Rule Changes
> I'm not sure where you get the impression that both stations sending
> both callsigns represents efficient communication.  It doesn't. The
> only reason it might facilitate your net activities is that nets today
> are not trying to pass messages at hundred per hour rates, and I
> guarantee that 99% of contesters are not contesting because they think
> it will hone their net skills.
> 73,
> Dave   AB7E
> On 10/16/2012 5:15 AM, Charles Harpole wrote:
>> Hurray for Randy and the CQ Contest Committee for finally facing the 
>> shady
>> ways contesters have used to artificially raise their scores. The best
>> reasons for contesting is that is sharpens skills in passing messages
>> completely and accurately.  I know my contesting helped me in running 
>> the
>> Hurricane Watch Net.
>> Hurray for insisting that every contact contains both call signs on BOTH
>> ends of the QSO.  Now maybe I will not have to wait hours for some 
>> "rapid
>> runner" to i.d.  Too, it used to be that the FCC REQUIRED stations in
>> contact to identify both themselves and the station they are in QSO 
>> with.
>> This helped regulatory monitoring but was dropped in favor of only self
>> identifying.... maybe about the time when FCC monitoring faded away.  
>> I can
>> see this rule assists the new Contest Committee monitoring, hee hee.
>> I was a ham for 30 years before I even heard of these ways of
>> cheating/shading.  .  Boy, was I innocent, and wondered how I scored so
>> low!  About that time, I learned of the practice of DX "insurance 
>> contacts"
>> too.
>> 73, Charly
>> PS, Dont forget to thank ARRL for taking the lead in these matters... 
>> wait,
>> skip that....  ARRL does not even publish everyone's scores in QST.
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list