I concur but just like people that answer a CQ by sending the CQing
station's callsign before their own, it is unlikely to change. If someone
happens to tune in and hear just my trailing CQ they have to wait. It is no
different than if I ended my CQ message with KK9A, like I do on SSB and CW,
and they only heard my callsign. At least if they heard my callsign they
would know if it was a dupe while waiting for the next CQ message. If RTTY
CQs were kept brief there would be no long wait that proponents of the
trailing CQ refer to.
John KK9A
To: "'RTTY Reflector'" <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: [RTTY] Trailing CQ
From: "Ed Muns" <ed@w0yk.com>
Reply-to: ed@w0yk.com
The rationale for a trailing 'CQ' in CQ and TU messages is no more true for
RTTY than CW. CW contesting has decades of existence proof that such a
trailing CQ is not needed, i.e., the rationale is flawed.
The only valid reason for the trailing 'CQ' in RTTY messages is that it has
(unnecessarily) been done that way for many years now. RTTY contesters
expect it and can be confused if it isn't there.
The advent of RTTY Skimmer offers a good reason to stop this practice, but
changing such an entrenched technique will take concerted effort by RTTY
contesters over a long period of time. However, the longer we wait, the
longer it will take to accomplish.
Why don't we drop 'CQ' from the end of our messages now and get on with the
transition?
Ed W0YK
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|