[CQ-Contest] Let's eliminate "QSO B4"

[brian coyne]

      From: brian coyne <g4odv at yahoo.co.uk>
 To: "n3rd at arrl.net" <n3rd at arrl.net> 
 Sent: Wednesday, 9 December 2015, 9:47
 Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Let's eliminate "QSO B4"
   
>> I had a guy call me on 15m in the CQ WW CW where he had  a 
>>> "Report" button on his computer:
>>> {MyCall} {MyCall} PLS COPY 59914 59914 TU ES 73 DE {HisCall)>>> {HisCall}  SK

Yep - and I wondered just how many of those guys, along with OM2015TITANIC and  xx90IARU stn's,  ZF2MJ had to handle and still maintain that phenomenal rate!
To get back to the subject matter,  I for one am in favour of 'QSO B4'.If I fat fingered Gilles call as VA3EW originally then that saves me a bust, although many 'holier than thou' types on here would regard it as a sin to amend my log. 

Additionally it could save Gilles a bust too - if I made a previous pass on his qrg and called a stn wkg close to him that he could not hear he could answer and think he worked me. Unfortunately, as we often hear, not all callers have the consideration, nor the sense, when hearing two stn's come back to them to then start the contact with the  c/s of the targeted stn.
As a runner it is tempting to just work the dupes but if they do not ID frequently they deserve all of the dupes that they get but best practice , as been mentioned by others, is to  immediately respond to a 'NO' by wkg the dupe.  There is nothing worse than being in a pile for a needed mlt who, more often than not, maybe a less experienced op. There will be a long pause then the op comes back and says 'Your qso nr 456 and the discussion goes on and on.
Of course I speak from a privileged position as having such a short contest call I do not get many cluster busts and I do ID after no more than three qso's..
73  Brian  C4Z / 5B4AIZ.



 

     From: Dave Hawes <dave.n3rd at verizon.net>
 To: cq-contest at contesting.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, 8 December 2015, 22:58
 Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Let's eliminate "QSO B4"
   
I had a guy call me on 15m in the CQ WW CW where he had programmed into his
"Report" button on his computer:

    {MyCall} {MyCall} PLS COPY 59914 59914 TU ES 73 DE {HisCall} {HisCall}
SK

This was a first, and hopefully the last time for this to happen to me.
Sheesh!

73 - Dave N3RD

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:47 PM, ve4xt at mymts.net <ve4xt at mymts.net> wrote:

> I suggest we'll be successful eliminating QSO B4 about the same time we
> get rid of "please copy"...
>
> 73, Kelly
> ve4xt
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On Dec 8, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Roberts, Will <Will.Roberts at duke-energy.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > For someone you think you have worked before... Unless it is SS with its
> very long exchange...JUST WORK THEM AGAIN!!
> >
> > PLEASE follow John's advice below. I had this happen to me in the ARRL
> 160 this past weekend. I had just gotten on the air and was working my 3rd
> contact, a well-known W8. He
> > Send "QSO B4". I replied NO. He then took the time to say "You got my
> call wrong" instead of just sending 5NN MI ! As it turns out, I expect he
> was the one who got MY call wrong as K4NC
> > was also active in the contest. It would have saved him a lot of time to
> have just worked me and moved on. If he had refused to work me and I had
> moved on, that first contact as well as
> > a missed QSO with me would have been a NIL.
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Will AA4NC
> >
> >
> >
> > Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 06:31:58 -0500
> >
> > From: "john at kk9a.com<mailto:john at kk9a.com>" <john at kk9a.com<mailto:
> john at kk9a.com>>
> >
> > To: cq-contest at contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com>
> >
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Is working the QSO B4 good on long term for
> >
> >        us ?
> >
> > Message-ID: <43934f80bc72cded6f632035a0bfd94d.squirrel at www11.qth.com
> <mailto:43934f80bc72cded6f632035a0bfd94d.squirrel at www11.qth.com>>
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
> >
> >
> >
> > That is unsportsmanlike conduct. Lets say we work early in the contest
> and I log you incorrectly as VA2EA,  Later I call VA2EW and you won't work
> me.
> >
> > You get credit for the previous contact and I don't. It would have been
> just as easy to give me a report the second time. QSO B4 is not one of my
> macros.
> >
> >
> >
> > John KK9A
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To:    cq-contest at contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com>
> >
> > Subject:        [CQ-Contest] Is working the QSO B4 good on long term for
> us ?
> >
> > From:  VE2TZT <ve2tzt at arrl.net<mailto:ve2tzt at arrl.net>>
> >
> > Date:  Mon, 07 Dec 2015 20:27:56 -0500
> >
> > List-post:      <cq-contest at contesting.com"<mailto:
> cq-contest at contesting.com%22>>mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > It is after that bad experience that I have decided to systematically
> refuse the QSO's B4.
> >
> >
> >
> > After all, if my callsign is busted in the other guy log, I do not lose
> the points but he lose the points and if he answers ''NO'' when I send QSO
> >
> > B4 then I will work him without discussion.
> >
> >
> >
> > Interested by your opinion on that point.
> >
> >
> >
> > Gilles VA2EW
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest