I prefer QSL or CFM over R or Roger. In cw if a letter is missed, the
missing letter can be 'filled in'. With R, if parts are missed, the missed
parts cannot be filled in. The same with SSB, but not to the same extent.
When I hear QSL or CFM it gives me a much higher level of confidence than R
or Roger.
Doug
>-----Original Message-----
>
> I agree with Roger. Both "QSL" and "CFM" are inefficient ways for
>indicating solid copy on CW. A simple "R" is all that's needed.
>
>73, Joe
>K2XX
>
>On 12/13/2011 10:19 AM, Roger D Johnson wrote:
>> My pet peeve is the use of QSL. It's supposed to indicate the receipt of
a
>> message. A simple "roger" will suffice for the receipt of a signal
report.
>>
>> 73, Roger (no ten impunded)
>>
>> On 12/12/2011 4:06 PM, Carl Clawson wrote:
>>>> Another constant irking remarks extant is the use of "Roger"
>>>> in place of
>>>> "over" or "go ahead". To which I always remark..."my name is
>>>> Herb, not
>>>> Roger....... Roger?
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
|