Drew wrote:
> The other fellow (sorry, forgot the call) about just having fun and not being
> vindictive. You are right and it is a good message to throw in the mix.
> This isn't an attack. That being said, we can still strive for best
> practices, and this can include up to DQ for the really bad actors.
>
The best answer here -- work him, ask for his call, NIL if refused -- isn't
about being vindictive, it's simply about giving him the chance to do the right
thing. The NIL at the end is required by the rules: if you don't know who you
worked, how can you call it a Q?
Plus, no rule or even common courtesy would demand you continue listening until
he finally does ID. Especially since if you let these guys affect your S&P
performance, you have only yourself to blame. Lots of fish in the sea...
Vindictive would be to work him, not ask for his call and then NIL him without
having given him the opportunity to earn your Q.
Then again, if we all simply ignored these arses, they'd have no pileups. It's
not unreasonable to ask: If you don't know who it is, why are you even calling?
Somehow, I don't think our pack mentality would allow it.
On phone, when the guy says you're a dupe, at least you can answer "But you
never ID, so how would I have known?"
73, kelly, ve4xt
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|