[CQ-Contest] Are you a Clueless Cluster Clicker?

[Joe]

I strive for the best accuracy when I contest. Unless I am 100% with no 
doubt that I got everything perfect, it does NOT go in the log.

I have been told before what I am about to say that I'm Nuts, and it was 
never like that.

But in my beginning contest days vintage 70's All logs and dupes were 
paper based. I strongly remember accuracy Was paramount. So much so, 
that the penalties for busted calls, and DUPES, was severe!

Maybe this is why some old farts still make a big deal about telling 
someone "You're a dupe OM" Because they remember how bad it was to have 
a "DUPE" in the log.

Now days you if you want, you could work someone 20 times on 40SSB if 
you want to with no penalty.

But I strongly remember, DUPES AND BUSTED Calls, had really tough 
penalties, Not only did you lose the points for the Dupe, and or busted 
call, BUT and this I strongly remember, You lost not only THAT contact, 
but the one before and after the bad QSO! As a penalty for not doing the 
one right. So mess up a call and ya lost three QSO's.

THEN I also remember an also overall accuracy, thing, That if the whole 
log had errors in it that exceeded a certain percentage, then the whole 
LOG was downgraded to a Checklog Status.

I'm in a minority here probably, But I would love to see this be a 
standard again. It surely would help cure the click and pounce group 
that doesn't listen for anything but their own call coming back at them.

Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 3/7/2017 8:51 PM, DXer wrote:
> Would increasing the penalty for busted calls mitigate this problem?
>
> The discussion seems to be pointing to experienced operators, those 
> that should know better, engaging in this behavior.
>
> For them it could be the cost of 'doing business', lots of Qs to 
> compensate, but if the penalty is increased, the 'economics' of 
> contesting changes.
>
> Ok, maybe not on the first busted call, but sounds like the community 
> has a pretty good knowledge, after each contest, of the calls that 
> generated the most incidents.
>
> Let's say after 3 or 4 of these busted calls, it's not a mistake, but 
> careless operating procedure.
>
> For the newbie caught in the net, it's a costly learning experience, 
> but as a friend used to say: a good education is not cheap.
>
> 73 de Vince, VA3VF
>
> On 2017-03-07 8:39 PM, Yuri wrote:
>
>>
>> I may e-mail you the extraction of my 6Y2T LOG (around the time I was 
>> incorrectly spotted) and you will see for yourself that most of these 
>> people who spotted and worked a BS call actually are FAR from being 
>> newbies.
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>