I would offer only this observation and opinion! to automating the
deletion of a dupe...
What if I *do* want to work him? Perhaps he missed my exchange the
first time? Perhaps I missed his exchange the first time?
Arguments on whether to work dupes or not tend to go on forever... But
in my case I will work ANYONE a second time to ensure that I get credit
for the contact. If something is wrong in the original exchange it will
get thrown out and I lose QSO credit. If I don't work them again - I'm
out of luck.
By working them again - the contact is no longer a dupe - but a complete
and correctly copied contact (hopefully).
Having the entry dialog diagnose dupes and automatically discard them
could tend to remove the operators decision to work them again if so
desired. You know the penalty for dupes ahead of time - and thus know
your pain threshold.
Like many of the other "Writelog versus XXX Logger" threads... I think
it comes down to what you've historically had. CT or TR did this or
that on this or whatever keystroke. Great. You're now using a new
program - a better one at that.
It should NOT be time to retrain the program to fit the operator, but
instead we should have to expect to retrain ourselves to use the
program. Writelog has included MANY options and concessions to help
with that learning curve. Expecting everything to work exactly the same
way from logging software to logging software is hardly productive.
I personally have used TR-in fact, I think I'm even still current. I did
like it's simplicity or complexity depending upon how many options I
wanted to effect. Writelog is no different. The difference is I knew
UP FRONT that they ARE different programs, and as such, have different
"reasons for being" and EXPECTED to have to learn the new interface.
ALT-W to clear the QSO ENTRY dialog is second nature to me now.
Options... That the user can elect... Are always a great addition. A
fixed fundamental change to the way a program functions... Will be a
distraction to those who retrained themselves and now have to learn
anew.
The concept you've presented with auto-deletion of dupes is one of those
fixed fundamental changes that I would hope we can avoid. Giving you
the option is another story altogether. I fully support having the
option if it can be implemented. Making it the rule... Isn't right in my
book. But when does it stop?
I say it stops when we retrain ourselves to use the programs we select
in the methods they are programmed to function. Writelog is BY FAR the
best logging software out there - BAR NONE. Perfect? NOPE. Is anything
else? NOPE.
What is that worth? Nothing perhaps. Just my opinion...and we all have
those!
Good luck... I hope you continue to use Writelog! You'll find it to be
everybit as productive as TR..and MORE!
-----Original Message-----
From: writelog-admin@contesting.com
[mailto:writelog-admin@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Ferry
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 1:39 PM
To: Writelog Reflector
Subject: Re: [WriteLog] Newbie observations (from the ex TR user)
It would only disappear after you hit the space bar to check the call.
Of course the callsign would then also have to be included in the "dupe
at ..." message at the bottom of the entry window.
Bob Naumann - N5NJ wrote:
>>For best operation during the contest the duplicate QSO needs to clear
>>automatically. I know this isn't what everyone would like so could it
>>be an option?
>>
>
>
> OK, I'm interested. What would trigger it being cleared
> automatically?
>
> You type in a dupe callsign and it dissappears? What if you work
> YU7ZZ, then later work YU7ZZZ? Does YU7ZZ disappear as soon as you
> type it?
>
> I'm unclear how this works.
>
> N5NJ
>
> _______________________________________________
> WriteLog mailing list
> WriteLog@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
>
>
_______________________________________________
WriteLog mailing list
WriteLog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
|