Topband: 160 and other Contest Log verification

[K3BU@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/23/2006 11:00:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
hsvdds at juno.com writes:

>>>........Wouldn't it make the contest in question more meaningful if the 
exchange RST/RS (which is 99% insignificant, superflous, and also false, i.e. 
automated 599/59) were changed to a serial number or significant number which 
would require synchronization to validate a QSO?????  As we all know, the signal 
report, in 99% of the contacts, is a farce, and the spirit of the meaning of 
the report is abused by programming 599 into a keyer.<<<

I think it very valid and timely suggestion to dispense with report in 
contest exchange. It has lost its meaning and it is redundant. I have been defender 
of keeping the report that it is usefull for traditional and award QSO 
requirement (and kind of forewarning what is coming next in exchange), but it lost 
its value for contesting. We either get the stuff and complete the QSO and who 
can watch the S-meter for "accurate" reporting.

The serial number, nowadays has much more significance, especially when some 
clever operating "things" are used (like not logging the "zeroes" etc.) I 
support the idea of SNs in the contest exchange, it is becoming more and more 
valuable and it should be implemented ASAP. Rules should say to use three digit 
serials STARTING with 001.

Val makes very good point and especially in the 160m contests, it would be of 
great benefit.

73 and CU as N2EE in CQ 160 CW!

Yuri, K3BU.us