DQ might be a bit harsh. Surely if a penalty is called for, it doesn't have
to be all or nothing!
Still... the exchange is a touch lengthy but pretty clear. SN, precedence
(power/class), call, year of license, section.
Just do it.
I mean, c'mon. Do we have to argue EVERY little detail, every little bit of
minutiae ad infinitum ad nauseum?
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Michael Coslo
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 4:56 PM
To: CQ Contest
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SS SSB And Your Callsign In The Exchange
On Nov 17, 2008, at 4:03 PM, John Brosnahan -- W0UN wrote:
>
> Everyone who chooses to ignore the exchange rule has an unfair
> advantage over those who follow the rules. That would certainly
> cheapen the victory of anyone who did not follow this (or any other)
> rule.
Would you DQ everyone who gives a callsign, but does not do it twice?
I would not. And any advantage is certainly not unfair. You choose to
nil the other op. I can make the exchange from the logged callsign and
the other parts of the exchange they send. It walks talks and quacks
like a proper exchange.
Perhaps the sponsor should be asked if the callsign has to be sent
twice, lest they be DQ'd.
Would you nil the contact if the exchange was made backward?
But seriously, if you want to nil everyone who does not, then have at
it.
-73 de Mike N3LI -
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|