/"//This selfish practice can easily be stamped out by working those
individuals but not logging the QSO."/
If I were a contest adjudicator and detected this practice, I would DQ the operator (the
one working a station but intentionally not logging the QSO). This violates the
"good sportsmanship" aspect of contesting. If you don't like how the other
station is operating, simply don't work him.
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 7/17/2014 5:06 AM, Ian White wrote:
W6SX wrote:
Absolutely. Keep the TU.
Indeed, TU is equivalent to QSL.
CQ TEST W6SX W6SX CQ
P40X
P40X 599 03
W6SX 599
P40X TU W6SX CQ
My TU to P40X says Thank You AND QSL, the contact is complete.
Keep the TU.
Absolutely!
A QSO is not complete until BOTH stations have received an
acknowledgement of the information they have sent - which means that the
run station must <send> that final acknowledgement before moving on to
the next caller. Without it, the QSO is incomplete.
Acknowledgement can take many different forms (examples from other modes
include "R", "Roger", "QSL" or "Thank you"). We can debate about how
many characters we wish to spend on this, but we always have to send
something, so the bottom line is at least ONE character. Sending
nothing, just moving on to the next caller, is the wrong side of that
line.
This practice of skipping the "ack" comes largely from individuals who
feel that their QSO rate is more important than everyone else's
uncertainty about having made a good QSO. This selfish practice can
easily be stamped out by working those individuals but not logging the
QSO.
73 from Ian GM3SEK
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|