[UK-CONTEST] UBN failures

[Roger Thawley]

I'm with you on those thoughts Paul and Rob.

I'll always give a report, which reflects the actual signal received. In
doing so, I hope that the other station will take that as a hint to either:
a) Where my report indicates they are strong and fully readable, feel it is
then unnecessary to respond by first repeating all the information I've just
given them and then repeat their report to me two or three times.
or
b) Where my report indicates they are weak and difficult to hear, do just
the opposite!

This turns out to be wishful thinking at times!

Roger, G0BSU

-----Original Message-----
From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Rob Harrison
Sent: 16 July 2011 11:15
To: Paul Selwood; 'David G3YYD'; UK-Contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] UBN failures

I'll second that, apart from the callsign the one thing that's unique in the

over, and makes the QSO valid. To default to is just laziness and a ploy to 
make more meaningless cntacts, mainly in contests. Ban it now.

Bob G8HGN

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Selwood" <g3ydy at blueyonder.co.uk>
To: "'David G3YYD'" <g3yyd at btinternet.com>; <UK-Contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] UBN failures


>
> Better still remove the auto 59 from all software
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of David G3YYD
> Sent: 16 July 2011 10:44
> To: UK-Contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] UBN failures
>
> The obvious conclusion is always give 59 as the report then no problem.
>
> 73 David
>
> On 16/07/2011 08:16, Roger Thawley wrote:
>> I see an interesting trend within UBN reports received by M0GVG. A
>> number of failed contacts are due to broken reports and, in almost
>> every case, we have logged that the other station has given us a
>> report other than '59' but the other stations have all logged that they
> have given us a '59' report.
>> Typically, the report we have logged is similar to the report we have
>> sent, perhaps suggesting that both the logged reports are correct. I'm
>> left wondering if the other stations logging software is automatically
>> inserting '59' and if the other operators are failing to replace this
>> with the 'actual' report they sent.
>>
>>
>>
>> Roger, G0BSU (M0GVG/P)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
> 



_______________________________________________
UK-Contest mailing list
UK-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1516/3767 - Release Date: 07/15/11