Another useless and endless discussion in the topband reflector ...... ----- Original Message ----- From: Doug Renwick To: k...@swva.net ; 'Roger D Johnson' Cc: topband@contesting.com Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 4:42 PM Subject: Topband: QSL or CFM or R?
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 _______________________________________________ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK