Jay,

I do not view it as harsh.  Harsh was when I went off HF JT modes completely 
for well over a year
because of it.   I am one of about five stations in ND that are on JT HF 
modes, one
of about three on both JT HF modes and LOTW and one of  one on JT HF modes, 
LOTW
and 12 and 160 meters.    I get on about twice a year to help folks with 
WAS,  I am
not a fan of HF period so it is generally not an enjoyable experience and I 
get a
resentful when folks start counting teeth...  I already know I am about 
ready for McDonalds
or the glue factory.

Both the WSJT and WSJTX manual clearly state what is considered a minimal 
QSO
and I am in complete agreement with it.   A QSO is complete when all of the
essential elements of if are complete and that includes one station 
receiving an RRR.

If others choose to use a different format that is purely their business 
just as it
is mine to choose not to accept less than the published minimal contact. 
At one point
I had a much more lenient policy about that which included sending TX3 a 
second
time then emailing the station letting them know what the issue was and 
offering a
retry.   However I was point blank told that I had no right to tell other 
stations what
to transmit, I capitulated completely and now have a policy where I 
terminate the contact
immediately upon deviation from the minimal QSO and do not offer a retry. 
The person
who was doing the complaining called me a crazy old ^&%$#$% when I made the 
change
so it must have been exactly the right thing to do.

As a personal side note I was hoping to make it to 60 before that happened 
but oh well...

I believe if there is going to be an auto sequencer one of its functions 
should be to
enforce the minimal QSO and not facilitate less than minimal QSOs.   That is 
both
for integrity of the QSO reasons and because it would be a pain to program 
all of the
variations that are floating around out there.   The only question mark 
there should
be for an auto sequencer is how to gracefully shut down the contact.  There
is a catch 22 in the logic to handle 73's that I believe is handled 
reasonably well in the WSJT
ISCAT auto sequencer that I hope to move over the WSJTX.

For those users who feel otherwise they can always override the auto 
sequencer and advance
if they feel the auto sequencer was being too strict.

73 de Bill ND0B


-----Original Message----- 
From: Jay Hainline
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 2:13 PM
To: WSJT software development
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer

Not logging it? That seems a little harsh. The sequencing was correct up to
that point. He had already received my R-signal report from me and just
bunched the RR73 into one transmit sequence. All I wanted to do was send the
73 transmission but for QSO purposes, it was complete at that point. I did
manually send the 73 sequence and the QSO was logged.

73 Jay

Jay Hainline KA9CFD
Colchester, IL EN40om

-----Original Message----- 
From: Bill Ockert - ND0B
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 15:54
To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer

The auto sequencer, while it should not have gone back to TX2, actually
acted in a
benign manner compared to what I would have done manually, namely ended the
contact
without the  benefit of logging it.

73 de Bill ND0B


-----Original Message----- 
From: Jay Hainline
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 6:56 AM
To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer

I had a small issue this morning working a station on 6 meters using
WSJTX-devel r5808 using JT9H mode and auto sequencing. The station I was
running with sent calls followed by RR73 programmed in the TX4 message
button. The auto sequencer on my end got confused by this and went back to
TX2 to send the report again. I was wondering if this is something where the
auto sequencer can be programmed to be a little more flexible? I think if I
copy either RRR or RR73, it should go to transmit TX5 which I have as
sending calls and 73.

The station I ran with says he is using version r5803 and claims RR73 was
pre-set for TX4 inside that particular version he downloaded. My WSJTX 1.6.1
copy has always had TX4 programmed with calls and RRR.

73 Jay

Jay Hainline KA9CFD
Colchester, IL EN40om



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Reply via email to