On 15/10/2018 22:58, IK1HJS Carlo De Mari wrote:
Bill....it's up the the other operator to have the report, not you to
make sure that your report has been received ok.
I've sent my report and if he hasn't got it he will ask again...
I have his call and report, for me the qso is ok. A lot of contacts
are "not in log" or with wrong reports and doesn't count for Contest
and award rules. This is because of the other operator not me or the
transmission protocol. It happens frequently.
I don't think that this is either a problem of a transmission
protocol. In fact in "DXPEDITION MODE" (TX1 and TX3 only ) there is
no RR73 but qso's are valid.
But this is just an accademic discussion...what is useless is (TX6)
also in normal (not Contest or DxPedition) qso's.
Anyway I would keep the RR73 (TX5) (although I don't think it's
necessary) but with a maximum repeat of two...then it shoud pass over
and prompt the log enter, and don't send any 73 (TX6) . This will stop
all the 73 request that I can see on the HF causing only qrm ( 3 or 4
or more periods make 1 minute and just to get a 73 while your qso has
already ended?).
73 de Carlo IK1HJS
Hi Carlo,
your view of what constitutes a valid two way QSO and the author's of
WSJT-X are not consistent. The definition of a QSO that we work with is
that callsigns and one other piece of QSO related information are both
sent *and confirmed as received*. This is consistent with even the most
brief DX-pedition QSO on HF CW and also with IARU handbooks defining
what a QSO is.
TBH if you want to shorten your QSOs then you need to look at the other
end, i.e. the start; there is no requirement to exchange grid squares
(they are not really confirmed as received, they are just extra
information passed with callsigns), in fact with some compound callsigns
it can't be done without some extra free text messages after the QSO.
As far as the WSJT-X developers are concerned the exchange and
confirmation of both callsigns and both reports is non-negotiable. The
exception may be in contests where the exchanged information
requirements are different but even the pure rate focused contest which
just use call areas or prefixes as multipliers still require exchange
and conformation of callsigns and reports, arguably the reports are
meaningless as they are always 59 or 599 but that is as a consequence of
rules that penalise incorrect copying of reports which is not an issue
with WSJT-X modes.
I am quite surprised that any operators feel that this minimum
requirement is too onerous, perhaps those folks should revert to just
logging every callsign they hear and never bother transmitting at all?
OTOH that taken to the limit will leave the bands silent! I am even more
surprised that some operators have asymmetric QSO completion
requirements, surely if others expect you to confirm receipt of a report
then you should not be so selfish to begrudge them of the same courtesy,
yet at least two of you seem to have stated that RR73 or RRR are not
necessary.
73
Bill
G4WJS.
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
