CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Comments on CQWW Rules

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Comments on CQWW Rules
From: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:23:51 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Agreed,

I use a two call rule.

When I find a station to work, if I know his call and not a dupe, great! if i don't,, I'll call anyway, and if he's a dupe his loss of time, too bad,, say who you are.

And at any rate be I know who it is or not, I call and only try twice if I do not get them in two tries. I move on, either the pile is too big or propagation isn't good enough. and try again later, on the next pass through the Band.

Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 6/24/2014 7:38 PM, ve4xt@mymts.net wrote:
Then don't sit there waiting. Use a quick men or radio 2 to find something else 
to work.

It seems, sorry to put such a fine point on it, Dave, that those who get 
frustrated sitting on a frequency waiting for someone to ID have only 
themselves to blame for choosing to just sit there. You might wait just to find 
out he's a dupe or not a new mult.

The QSOs you lose waiting are more valuable than this guy anyway. And if he's 
got such a pileup, he'll still be there when you tune back.

73, Kelly
ve4xt



It's boring to sit on a frequency listening to a string of QSOs being made by 
other contesters who got the callsign from a spot or by DX'ers who aren't 
really in the contest and couldn't care less how long it takes to snag a rare 
one
_______________________________________________
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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>