[RTTY] Trailing CQ

[Mark n2qt]

I run low power in the contests, and as such most of my contacts are s/p.  With the 
slower cadence of a rtty contest CQ, I really like the trailing CQ, so I can decide if 
the station is suitable for me to call without waiting through another sequence.  

Mark. N2QT

> On Mar 24, 2016, at 5:04 PM, Dave Hachadorian <k6ll.dave at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm all in favor of dropping the trailing CQ.
> 
> In fact, I made the same proposal one year ago:
> http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00083.html
> 
> My proposal received little support at the time, but maybe this
> time we can start putting an end to this idiosyncratic RTTY practice.
> 
> Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
> Yuma, AZ
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Ed Muns
> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 1:35 PM
> To: 'RTTY Reflector'
> Subject: [RTTY] Trailing CQ
> 
> 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 at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty 
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty