I don't believe that we need to develop a NEW set of abbreviations. There
are ARRL standard abbreviations and YES they are available on the web site.
They also used to be published on the official forms in the old paper days.
IMHO, there is no excuse for not having the correct abbreviations.
I agree with Bill, I am not from CA and am not intimate with the CA section
names. Even after doing SS for decades, I still struggle with some of the
CA sections. If I can't think of it immediately, I ask the station for the
abbreviation. So, if they just said the abbreviation, it would be faster
and more accurate for both of us!
One other problem is logging software which allows so called aliases. This
is a problem as people are setting things to the non-official names. The
real problem is that the software saves the alias name not the official
name. Since there are already programs with this feature and people who are
apparently dependent on it... I think that the software ought to put the
official name in the log that is submitted if they allow this feature.
There is more I would like to say about what is being sent in for logs but
will refrain at this point. All I will say is read the rules, know your
software and spend a few minutes before you mail it. You spent 4-48 hours
doing the contest, many spend hours afterwards 'cleansing' their log... take
a few minutes and look at what you send in before you send it. Also, note
that most contest sponsors require what you sent in each QSO line in the
log. This usually means that the print file with headers and all is not
what they want! Saying that your sent info is on your summary is not the
same either, the log checkers don't get the summary sheet. You know what
you did, don't make someone else guess at what you did... they have to do it
thousands of times, you only have to do it once!
73 Tim K9TM
-----Original Message-----
From: W2CE <W2CE@prodigy.net>
To: Martin Ellis <jmellis@ihug.co.nz>
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Re: LAX is not LA
>
>> Ken K6LA wrote:
>>
>> > Most of the people who busted QSOs with my exchange were dinged
>> > for submitting LA instead of LAX. Now on phone it seems to me
>> > that shouldn't be a cause for a busted QSO,
>> > as Los Angeles IS LA.
>
>Maybe we need to develope and spread a new set of abbreviations in the
>cases of onflicting ones. LAX - LA SD -SDG are certainly at the top
>of the error list.
>Why couldn't Los Angeles be LOS ? Are these abbreviations actually
>publlished official ARRL abbreviations or what has developed as
>standards fom logging programs.
>
>--
>
>
> 73, Bob Reed, W2CE
>
>===================================================================
> W2CE@prodigy.net W2CE@aol.com W2CE@juno.com W2CE@arrl.net
>===================================================================
>
>
>--
>CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
>Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>
>
>
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|