John
Even if it took you 5 minutes to bust a pileup the first time, you would
spend another 5 minutes to see if you got a confirmation the next time?
Lee
----- Original Message -----
From: <john@kk9a.com>
To: <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] The RTTY efficiency myth and SUPERFILL
Is this a common problem? If I was unsure of the contact I would just call
again and make a new QSO.
John KK9A
To: <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] The RTTY efficiency myth and SUPERFILL
From: "Lee Sawkins" <ve7cc@shaw.ca>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 13:18:05 -0700
This selfish practice can easily be stamped out by not logging the QSO of
those who do not send an acknowledgement.
73 Lee
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Chudek - K0RC" <k0rc@citlink.net>
To: <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] The RTTY efficiency myth and SUPERFILL
/"//This selfish practice can easily be stamped out by working those
individuals but not logging the QSO."/
If I were a contest adjudicator and detected this practice, I would DQ the
operator (the one working a station but intentionally not logging the
QSO). This violates the "good sportsmanship" aspect of contesting. If you
don't like how the other station is operating, simply don't work him.
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
_______________________________________________
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
|