Topband: 3C6A

[k6xt]

I started that thread without a real thought of its applicability to 
3C6A. Just pointing out the facts, ma'am as Jack might say. In fact 3C6A 
ops seem to be doing very well sticking with a call til its accurately 
logged. My own experience with them on 30M is instructive. I worked them 
twice (insurance since no online log) on 30M, both times weak with QSB 
and the usual QRM such that they had to reply twice, the second reply 
sending my call twice. A good job!

73 Art K6XT~~
Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasm.


On 2/25/2012 6:06 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote:
>
> On 2012-02-24, at 4:47 PM, k6xt wrote:
>
>> There's two sides to the DX Code of Conduct pictured on the site. One 
>> of them is our side, the callers. The other is the DX side. Referring 
>> especially to sticking with a partial call until its correct in the 
>> log, no matter the jamming level. Often what we hear is the DX gives 
>> up and
>> moves on to one of the intentional QRM jammer incessant callers. A 
>> tactic guaranteed to increase the incessant caller activity level.
>
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> A look back through my late 1920's issues of QST magazine reveals a 
> monthly column entitled, I believe, "PREHISTORIC SIGNALS". Therein, 
> for all to behold, were the specific call signs of stations heard 
> during the previous month that had not pulled-up their bootstraps on 
> the eve of newer, more stringent regulations from the then FCC 
> regarding signal quality...
>
> These offenders were guilty of such things listed as "raw AC on 
> signal", "extreme drift", "excessive chirp", etc. etc. etc. The idea, 
> obviously, was that offenders so "outed" would be inspired (shamed is 
> more like it!) to re-vamp their transmitters, bringing them up to the 
> then "modern" standards.
>
> I wonder if a similar such list of "PREHISTORIC OPERATING STANDARDS" 
> might be in order to-day?
>
> DX-pedition operators know the repeated callers, the out-of-turn 
> callers, etc. only too well---as do those of us on this side of the 
> pile-up. Does working these offenders not, effectively, REWARD their 
> "prehistoric operating standards"? Would it, perhaps, be better for 
> the organizers of such DX treks to publish the call signs of REPEAT 
> offenders on their web site, for all to see (including, hopefully, the 
> offenders themselves)...?
>
> I don't know what general consensus might be on such an idea, but it's 
> apparent that whatever excellent codes of DX conduct exist in the 
> printed form on-line, in the various Amateur publications, etc., they 
> are completely & utterly lost upon a GROWING cadre of so-called 
> "DX'ers". Perhaps the time is nigh to stop relying upon the "honour 
> system" to elevate standards, and to instead, cite poor operating 
> standards & etiquette in a public way...because things are hardly 
> improving on the air, such as they are.
>
> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>
>