[RTTY] Re: Contest Happenings??

[JOHN DOBSON]

does the arrl still require a  signal report as in 59 or 599 for a valid
contact??   thats the only reason Id see for the inclusion of rst in the
report----
of course, I feel that  due to speeding  qso rate  up, contesting and dxing
has created this situation...
john w8wej
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Shelby Summerville" <k4ww at arrl.net>
To: "rtty-contesting" <rtty at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 11:24
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Re: Contest Happenings??


> "Dick Kriss, AA5VU" <aa5vu at arrl.net> wrote: " I learn something new
> in each contest."
>
> Then, IMHO, your contest effort was a success!
> Personally, I fail to see any reason to acknowledge the "other station's"
> report: "N5UWY/9 TNX 555 UR 181 181 181 de AA5VU"? Your reply to me,
without
> any "again, NR, etc", tells me that you have copied, and are satisfied
with,
> what I sent? The inclusion of an RST, in a contest that doesn't require
one,
> is simply a waste of time, for both stations? Depending on conditions, I
> use:
> CR XX3XX exchange exchange CR
> or
> CR XX3XX exchange exchange exchange exchange QSL??CR
>
> The "CR" is far more important, for me, than the repeated exchange, as it
> will get the exchange on a "new" line, without all the "mess"?
>
> C'Ya, Shelby - K4WW
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/05
>
>



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/05