As someone else observed the detection by the offender is much
too late to be useful. The offender would probably conclude
"you" messed up by not logging the QSO. There is nothing that
would lead me, as the offender, to think I did anything wrong and
more specifically that it was because I didn't send my call often
enough to please you.
73, Larry W6NWS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@earthlink.net>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 6:55 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] unIDs
> Guys, you are all missing the best way to police the offenders. Work them
> but don't log them. If they see their UBN rate climbing, they will change
> their practice. After all, they are trying to win. And a lower net score
> will not help them win. So, if you want to make a point, do that.
>
>
>
> You could call it unsportsmanlike to do this but I would argue its worse
> to
> not sign for minutes on end.
>
>
>
> Personally, what I do is move on but memorize the freq and keep returning
> until I hear the call and then log it. I noticed with one guy, I logged
> it
> 10 mins after actually working the guy. I then wondered if the time
> difference would bust the Q for me in the log checking but decided to log
> it
> any way.
>
>
>
> To KR2Q's comment, I would beg to differ with your observation. You could
> hear me arrive, work the guy and "appear to move on", but I am still
> listening for the call. And I don't use packet or skimmer. So be careful
> what you assume.
>
>
>
> Ed N1UR
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|