| 
/"Should this be publicized more clearly?"/
All joking aside, I think the examples you provided are clear enough. To 
avoid the unwelcome surprises, it would call for your examples to be 
published where more people will read them. Stating the examples here is 
fine, but this forum is more or less like preaching to the choir! 
So... if we look at our watches and it's noon, and you tell me "I'll 
meet you back here in an hour for a beer", I would expect you at 1:00. 
There's nothing wrong with that, but technically only 59 full minutes 
have passed, as you have shown. 
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 7/4/2013 1:18 PM, Ward Silver wrote:
 It has nothing to do with "the robot".  if the mechanics are of 
interest, this is a consequence of how logs are (and must be) checked 
when there are no seconds in the time.  The robot only checks to be 
sure that the log is properly formatted according to the Cabrillo 
standard and that certain data elements like contest name and 
date-and-time are acceptable.  It is the log-checking software that 
calculates off-time.
The log checking software generally assessed off-time by determining 
whether during every individual clock minute (remember...no seconds) 
you were "on" or "off" the air.  You can't be both during an 
individual clock minute - you can only be "on" or "off".  When an 
"off" minute is detected - no QSOs logged during that minute - the 
off-time counter ticks up by one, starting from zero.  It has to tick 
for 60 consecutive minutes (in this particular contest) before a valid 
break time is considered to have occurred.  If an "on" minute is 
detected before 60 ticks have occurred, the off-counter is reset to 
zero.  There is no rounding up to the nearest clock minute. 
Should this be publicized more clearly?  I should think so, as not 
entirely unreasonable assumptions about what constitutes 60 minutes 
are being made in the absence of a clear specification, resulting in 
unwelcome surprises to the customers. 
73, Ward N0AX
On 7/4/2013 10:04 AM, cq-contest-request@contesting.com wrote:
 Now, of course, we know that the robot isn't too smart, so we must 
let up to
61-minutes pass (at least those few of us who read this thread now know
that).
 
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
 
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
 |