I have received a number of responses basically saying "take the contact out" because "it's not a valid QSO." The implication is that if the other guy won't answer my request for fills then he deserv
I would delete the QSO from my log, and hope the other guy doesn't get mad at me when he sees his UBN report. I would probably make a mental note to maybe dupe the guy later on just to make sure he d
So I am guessing the answer to my question is there is not a way to do what I want. Either I take the hit for being an idiot or I impose the hit on the innocent guy. I don't like either option. Tree?
I will confess to saying the above. Yeah - well I guess we could go back to the old SS scoring and get one point for sending and one for receiving. None of the contests that I am familiar with have a
Since deleting the completed contact by the run station because of a computer glitch is a random act, it should affect all stations by the same percentage through random ocurrance. Although deleting
I agree. I think mostly I'm skittish because of my personal situation. I was a decent, active operator up until about 1991, prior to the days of UBN reports (I got a benchmark because my logs were us
Well, he thinks it was a good QSO. So he should not be penalized. That is why the QSO should be left in your log. Is there a penalty involving the loss of additional QSO's for NAQP? If you only lose
I guess I don't get it. If you don't log him, you lose the points. If you log him incorrectly, you lose the points. I don't think there is a penalty for having one more station in the UBN, is there?
Hardly. It was due totally to my own stupidity, and presumably we are all not equally stupid. My guess is some of us are stupider than others. Therefore I think the statement: is not true...? Mark,
<< Hardly. It was due totally to my own stupidity, and presumably we are all not equally stupid. My guess is some of us are stupider than others. Therefore I think the statement: >> What I mean to sa