Tue, 7 Sep 1999 15:28:43 -0400
Mike, N2MG wrote:
>Please tell me the preferred technique for "fixing" this problem.
>I worked a station, X and sent my exchange (he was my number, say,
>100). I hit enter but he asked for a repeat of the number. I used
>ALT-1, but NA sends the info from the "current" line which is now
>number 101. (I think NA should NOT do this if there is no callsign
>entry there; some may disagree.) So of course, X copied the wrong
>number and left. So I re-logged him on QSO 101's line and entered
>my own call (N2MG) on QSO 100's line so that I could find it later.
>Unfortunately, my call now "counts" towards the total.
>What should I have done, and what should I do to provide the proper
To answer the question first, what I do is simply make the erroneous
QSO a duplicate of the previous. No contest I know of penalizes for
marked dupes, and this is the easist way to make a QSO "benign" while
keeping the serial numbers correct.
I'd also like to address Mike's comment that NA should NOT (using his
example) sent 101 when he meant to re-send 100. NA used to be coded
as he proposed. If the callsign field is filled, 101 would be sent,
but if it was empty, the previous number (100) would be sent. The
problem with this method was that while running people, you *had* to
have the callsign in the field or else the previous number would be
sent in error. To put it another way, N2MG calls me for QSO 101 but
I don't have time to get his call in the callsign field, so I just
grab the paddle and hit Ins, but Mike get's 100 sent his way, not 101
as is correct.
As is often the case, this is one of those situations where both
strategies have fundamental shortcomings, so the clearest solution
seemed to be having NA *always* send the QSO number of the line
*the cursor is on*. Yeah, if you want to send a repeat, you gotta
move the cursor, but this seemed to be less inconvenient than the
the field before t
Administrative requests: na-user-REQUEST@contesting.com