My understanding of the problem is S&P operators like CQ at the end to save
time. Skimmers like the CQ at the end so they know its a valid CQ -
running station. Problem is when someone tailends the CQ with their own
call (perfectly OK practice) it fools the skimmers into thinking they
called CQ. Suggestion: instead of attempting to change the operating
practice, suppose running stations end with CQ {period} {space} This keeps
S&P ops happy. If skimmers do nothing, status quo is maintained. If
skimmers alter software to ignore calls after the CQ {period}, spotting
accuracy is improved. Comments? --Mike, WV2ZOW
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Ed Muns <ed@w0yk.com> wrote:
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|