On Dec 31, 2007, at 09:45 , mstangelo@comcast.net wrote:
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: Paul Kelley N1BUG <paul.kelley.n1bug@gmail. wrote:
>
>> I think this is an interesting idea. In addition to these two
>> reasons, I would enjoy knowing which stations are QRP. I usually
>> don't know I'm working a QRP station unless they go out of their way
>> to tell me. Last year I worked a couple of QRP stations who later
>> emailed to tell me they were QRP and wanting to know if I remembered
>> how strong they were. I didn't. If I had known they were QRP at the
>> time of the contact I would probably have given an RST report.
>>
>> I love the SP just the way it is, but I think this would be an
>> interesting addition.
>>
>> 73,
>> Paul N1BUG
> For the life of me I don't understand why contesters don't send the
> actual RST. The purpose of a QSO is to extablish 2 way
> communications and one way to verify this is to exchange some basic
> information. Exchanging RST will also help in studying propagation
> and antenna performance and is good feedback to QRP operators like
> me. Blindly sending RST 599 is just noise.
> I know ot will slow things down and make the operators really
> operate but the challenge will make contesting better in the long
> run...
But RST, honest or otherwise, isn't part of the SP exchange...
73,
John Bastin, K8AJS
bastinj@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
|