RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] Re: Contest Happenings??

To: "Ian White, G3SEK" <g3sek@ifwtech.co.uk>, <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Re: Contest Happenings??
From: "Bob Henderson" <bob@cytanet.com.cy>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 07:21:30 -0000
List-post: <mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
Ian

I believe you are correct about what Shelby was referring to and I share
your view.  I disagreed with what Shelby appeared to be saying rather than
what I now undertand he meant.

I have run into controversy over acknowledgements after DXpeditions.  In
particular, having operated 160m from ZD9ZM I received quite a few QSL cards
from folks I had heard calling me and to whom I had responded but failed to
receive an acknowledgement.

Regrettably today with DX Cluster, one way cluster supported "QSOs" which
can easily be engineered by those inclined to do so.

Bob, 5B4AGN, P3F

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <G3SEK@ifwtech.co.uk>
To: <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Re: Contest Happenings??


> Shelby Summerville wrote:
> >I said: "Personally, I fail to see any reason to acknowledge the "other
> >station's"
> >report:", and what I meant was "there is no reason to acknowledge the
other
> >station's ACTUAL exchange"!!!
>
> Still a slight confusion here. Most people understand "acknowledge" to
> mean a simple confirmation of receipt by sending nothing more than "R",
> "QSL" or "TU".
>
> As I'm understanding you now, you're saying there is no need to repeat
> back what the other station sent to you - and I'd agree 100% with that.
>
> >I don't need to know that you copied my serial
> >number correctly, that is your responsibility!
>
> Agreed again. It's a two-way contract between two operators who trust
> each other's judgement. I trust you to log my info correctly... and
> until you are completely satisfied, I trust you to keep asking for
> repeats and *not* send an ack. Therefore I will hang in with the QSO
> until I *do* receive an ack, and will NEVER log a QSO without it.
>
> At least, that's my experience after 20 years of moonbounce QSOs, most
> of them at very weak signal levels where you have to be *completely*
> clear about what a QSO is - or is not.
>
>
> --
> 73 from Ian G3SEK
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>


_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>