Hi all,

We must ALWAYS send the sending callsign. Period.

Downunder, we replace the " " (space) with a "/" between the receiving callsign 
and the report eg.

VK3AMZ/26 VK2ZIW 26

So, onlookers can figure out, in garbled MS messages, who's who.

Does this make sense?

Alan VK2ZIW

On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 15:23:47 -0700, George J Molnar wrote
> Agree, Bill. Auto-sequence should be the same as manual, and RR73 isn't a 
> good way to complete, nor is anything else that fails to include your 
> callsign.
> 
> George J Molnar, CEM, CHPP
> Nevada Statewide Interoperability Coordinator
> @GJMolnar | KF2T | AFA9GM
> 
> On Aug 24, 2015, at 3:18 PM, Bill Ockert - ND0B <n...@ockert.us> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Mike,
>  
> No   I do treat RRR 73 as a valid ending when I handle it manually.  I treat 
> RR73 as improper in both in content and in white space.      
>  
> Bill
> 
>  
> 
> From: Michael Black 
> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 4:53 PM
> To: Bill Ockert - ND0B ; WSJT software development 
> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer
>  
> 
> Just curious Bill -- do you treat RR73 as a valid QSO ending?
> About 7% of users use that according to my logs.
> 
> Mike W9MDB
> 
>  
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Bill Ockert - ND0B <n...@ockert.us> wrote:
> 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
> 
>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>

Alan

Man's greatest waste of time: Worshipping the wrong God. 
Consider Jesus. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Alan Beard               Unix Support Technician from 1984 to today 
70 Wedmore Rd.           Sun Solaris, AIX, HP/UX, Linux, SCO, MIPS 
Emu Heights N.S.W. 2750  Routers, terminal servers, printers, terminals etc.. 
+61 2 47353013 (h)       Support Programming, shell scripting, "C", assembler 
0414 353013 (mobile)     After uni, electronics tech
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Reply via email to