[Elecraft] suggestions for EQP practice

[David A.Belsley]

Mike:
   Well, I agree that my suggestion to use the short-hand response is 
not that good, but not for the reason you give.  Wayne correctly 
pointed out that it would confuse informal participants, and I think 
that is true.  However, your concern does not really have force.  Since 
non-Elecraft participants will not be using a response that includes 
the K, there is no reason anyone should, a priori, be expecting the K 
as the first letter of the exchange.   But, be that as it may, I agree 
with your ultimate conclusion.  And, yep, with an NJ2 call, we ought be 
able to hook up, or, boy, the bands will be in very bad shape.

best wishes,

dave belsley, w1euy



On Mar 11, 2005, at 6:19 AM, <mikekopacki at verizon.net> wrote:

> David, I would disagree with you.
>
> One of the things that make contesting a little bit easier (sometimes) 
> is the fact that there is a published exchange, and if everyone 
> follows it, I think it ends up providing much smoother contacts 
> because you "know" what's coming next.
>
> How many times has someone sent something out of order in a contest, 
> and that's the way you copied it into your logger, then you had to go 
> back and reenter the fields because now it's not right?
>
> Everyone is going to be expecting a "K" as the first letter in the rig 
> portion of the exchange for almost all of their qso's.  Sending 
> something different, especially a number instead of a letter (in this 
> case) I think will just cause more problems for most people and would 
> not justify trying to save the amount of time it takes to sent a "K".
>
> Having said that, hope to see you on the air.  K
>
> 72,
> Mike, NJ2OM
>
>
>
>>
>> From: David A.Belsley <belsley at bc.edu>
>> Date: 2005/03/10 Thu AM 07:47:37 CST
>> To: Elecraft Reflector <elecraft at mailman.qth.net>
>> Subject: [Elecraft] suggestions for EQP practice
>>
>> May I suggest that we try to make the EQP contest unique among current
>> contests by attempting to give actual (meaningful) signal reports.
>> Because of the association of this content with QRP, the wholesale use
>> of 5nn seems really quite out of place.  It will also be good practice
>> to those who haven't fully come to grips with the proper use of RST
>> reports to learn to make snap judgments about a proper report.  Those
>> snap judgments are usually pretty good, often better than ones that 
>> get
>> deeper consideration.
>>
>> And if you are looking to find a way to make up for the little bit of
>> time it takes to give an honest report, consider adopting, in place of
>> sending "K2 nr 4321" or "K1 nr 548" simply 2/4321 or 1/548.
>>
>> Looking forward to getting some new s/n's, (there aren't any more
>> states)
>>
>> dave belsley, w1euy, 2/744
>> _______________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
>> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
>>  http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
>> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
>>
>
>