[NLRS] Contest behaviors and ethics...

[John (JK) Kalenowsky, K9JK]

Cris and NLRSers,

Just to be clear...I wasn't trying to say or imply that station 1 SHOULD get 
credit for that contact even though station 1 may have LEGITIMATELY thought 
that he (and for PC, I should add 'or she') did indeed WORK station 2 (even 
though that was not the case). Station 1 should NOT get contact credit and a 
penalty of removal of an additional QSO (or three for a log submitted on 
paper) IS appropriate. Now, if station 2 does not submit a log...there is no 
way that the "contest adjudicating authority" can know that both station 1 
and station 3 are claiming credit for the "same" QSO. In that case, station 
1 has gotten lucky.

Now, whether or not Station 1 should have assumed that the contact with 
Station 2 was complete and even logged it is a separate issue...station 1 
may very well have transmitted to station 2 something on the order of "... 
and you confirm that you are working <my/station1 call sign>" and station 2 
responds with roger, roger, roger EVEN THOUGH the roger, roger roger was 
actually confirming something with station 3, how far do we expect station 1 
to continue to try and confirm or what confidence level do we expect station 
1 to try and reach?

Do "we" really expect every transmission within a contest QSO/exchange to 
begin and end with transmission of BOTH of each station's calls?

At what level of confidence does/should station 1 ("we") decide whether or 
not to enter that contact in the ("our") log?

Personally, I also often ask for repeats and make sure that I actually hear 
the complete exchange including both calls and the grid square on the 
particular band even though I may already know the information for the other 
station.

I've also had situations where the contact was really tough on a particular 
band and I go back to a liaison frequency and tell the station to repeat an 
item of the exchange multiple times on the other band...e.g. I've only heard 
one of the callsigns but can't pull the grid square or other callsign out 
(even though I KNOW what it is)...is *that* 'cheating'? I DO make sure that 
I hear ALL the elements of the exchange (including the other station's 
confirmation that they heard what *I* transmitted to them) on the other 
band, and I ALSO make sure that the other station indicates that THEY heard 
what I transmitted ON the other band (though I don't make them repeat what 
they heard to me). Again, how far does one need to go?

This subsequent stuff is part of the individual contester's ethics and there 
are LOTS of facets to that. How much time/reflector bandwidth do "we" want 
to spend on discussing/debating/specifying standards for THOSE aspects? (if 
any).

73, JK

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris Cox, N0UK" <chrisc at BritishCarAndDriver.Com>
To: "John (JK) Kalenowsky, K9JK" <hamk9jk at ameritech.net>
Cc: <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 11:29
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Re: Log Checking Reports for VHF Contests




On Sun, 23 Oct 2005, John (JK) Kalenowsky, K9JK wrote:
> And it's not always dishonesty...while I suspect there *are* cases of
> dishonesty, there are also legitimate mistakes (and MORE of these than
> dishonesty, I would hope) where station 1 thinks they were working station 
> 2
> yet station 2 was working station 3 and it just happened to coincide with
> timing that the "R"s or "QSL"s or Rogers made station 1 think that station 
> 2
> was confirming with them, station 1, rather than station 3, who station 2
> was really confirming with...maybe station 2 did not repeat the call of
> station 3 later in the exchange and/or maybe station 1 was digging station 
> 2
> from right at the noise floor of his station so wasn't able to copy
> everything perfectly. These and similar situations DO occur.

<soapbox>
You are correct, Jon, that the above events do occur but, in my opinion,
as the contest rules require that we EXCHANGE complete sets of callsigns
and the appropriate report, plus confirmation, that these partial contacts
are exactly that - partial and incomplete.  Whether it be due to
negligence, lack of skill/confidence, or an attempt to improve the qso
rate by not giving the pair of callsigns, then I think the contact
shouldn't be included in the final score.  I think sometimes people get a
little frustrated at me when I keep asking for a repeat of some piece of
the exchange, especially when I *know* what I should be hearing but, until
I have actually heard that item during that contact, I will keep asking!
</soapbox>

I think I have seen this behaviour most often on the HF bands but I have
noted it during the VHF and microwave contests too.

 -- 
73  Chris Cox, N0UK  email: chrisc at chris.org or 
Alice at BritishCarAndDriver.Com

 Home Page: http://WWW.BritishCarAndDriver.Com   http://www.pingjockey.net

  Come and join us here in Minnesota, July 27th 2006, for the 40th annual
   Central States VHF Society Conference, hosted once again by the NLRS.