Ah, but what if I'm operating from a different QTH than usual? Or I moved
since the software was updated last?
Wouldn't you be ticked off if the software told you that I was Pittsburgh PA
WPA Section, when I was actually in Dover DE DEL Section? And because the
software logged me wrong, you not only got dinged for the "bad" QSO, but
missed out on a sweep because you never worked another DE station?
Or better yet... the software isn't aware that a once-active contest call
has been inactive for, say, 2 years, and just got reassigned. So the
software thinks you've worked N3BM in PA or K3FT in MD... but those calls
now belong to someone else somewhere else. (Last minute updates? Sure...
if the operator remembers, and more importantly, whomever is providing the
software database makes sure IT'S got the last minute updates.)
Look... if you want to replace the RS(T) with something else, or drop it
altogether, that's fine. We can all talk about it... again. That's a
different thread though.
Until that happens, the rules are the rules. You may not like the rules,
but you do have to follow them.
Someone mentioned in another thread that statistically, it appears that over
99% of the participants in this year's CQ WPX SSB followed the rules.
Assuming those numbers are more or less correct... why are we arguing over
changing the rules, specifically the exchange? Is it because the exchange
is obsolete (and what's wrong with a little tradition these days anyway?),
or because less than 1% chooses not to follow the rules because they can't
be bothered to send it as specified?
Let's keep things in perspective here!
73
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Chris Plumblee
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 2:40 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Improper WPX Exchanges
I think the push to trim the fat of contest exchanges has been going
on for some time. I recall a few years ago working a European station
who did not give RST in CQWW. I logged "14" as "59 14" and didn't
think much of it.
If we're eliminating useless information in exchanges, should we do
the same for zones in CQWW and IARU? All the software knows what zone
you're in. I hardly pay attention anymore.
4O3A: 4O3A Test
K1AR: K1AR
4O3A: K1AR TU 4O3A
W3LPL: W3LPL
4O3A: W3LPL TU 4O3A
K8MR: K8MR
4O3A: K8MR TU 4O3A
etc etc
Think of all the time-wasting 5NN and and zone information that would
save! It would make SO2R easier too...much snappier exchanges.
73,
Chris WF3C
Note: I'm not really suggesting we eliminate all exchange information
for CQWW. RST is antiquated, doubly so if it's not even checked in log
checking, but if the sponsors want it, I for one will give it to them.
But answer this seriously - if you were (or are) a serious competitor
and got an exchange like this from a European in IARU or CQWW and your
software knew their zone already, would you ask them for a fill? They
sent your call as acknowledgment.
_______________________________________________
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
|