[CQ-Contest] cut numbers

[Bob Henderson]

Inherent in the deployment cut numbers should be an assessment by the sender 
of whether they will firstly, be understood and secondly, whether it matters 
if they are not.

If  in CQWW, neither RST nor zone are cross checked, then on the face of it, 
it doesn't matter if folks copy what you send, so save time by sending the 
shortest form consistent with your obligation under the rules. However, 
there is a risk the recipient will understand so little of what you have 
sent, that he'll decide not to log you at all.  If he then makes an entry, 
ur N-I-L. Also, just because rst and zone weren't cross checked last year, 
doesn't make it a certainty they won't be this year or perhaps next. It 
isn't enshrined in the rules that these won't be checked.

Just as in life, actions have consequences & risk increases with 
opportunity.

To date, Jose's assessment has been excellent.  His results confirm it. He 
is an extremely competent operator who has my admiration, not least for his 
SO2R prowess.

73 Bob, 5B4AGN

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hank Kohl K8DD" <k8dd at arrl.net>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cut numbers


>
>> N6TJ said: "Simply asked:  why send more than required to get the message 
>> across?"
>>
>>
> Art Boyars wrote:
>> (Side-sidebar:  And if you know that -- as I suspect --  the log-checking 
>> software does not check the RST, then instead of telling me that, explain 
>> why we have to send RST.)
> So ...... to save sending time ...... and if the RST doesn't much matter
> .....
>
> EEEE         RST 555 zone 5
> EEEV         RST 555 zone 4
>
> Is that going too far with the cut numbers?
>
> 73    Hank    K8DD
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>