Bill, Larry, Iztok, others; The rules for a valid QSO have long been established. Look up and read the "World Above 50 Mc", "What is a contact?", in QST, March/April 1953, by Ed Tilton. Part of it says: "First the basic minimum of identification and exchange is a must. You call. The other fellow answers. If you positively identify him, and establish that he was coming back to you, you send a signal report. (More on that later. ) If he gets the signal report, he then sends you one. If you get it, you send “ R.’‘ If he gets the single letter, he also sends ‘‘ R, ‘‘ and the QSO is over, as far as the claim for a contact is concerned. There is no obligation to hear or send closing 73, or SK, or confirmation of either of these items. You send the SK, of course, as the indication for other listeners that you’re through, but you don’t have to exchange SK’s!" There is no allowance for anyone to send a report before he has copied his own, and the calling station's call sign. 73, Russ K2TXB From: Bill Somerville <g4...@classdesign.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 10:10 AM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] FT4 logging prompt Russ, the only "rules" for QSO validity I have seen specify exchange of full callsigns and confirmation of receipt of same, along with exchange of some piece of QSO specific information and confirmation of receipt of same. That piece of QSO specific might be a signal report but I am pretty sure that is not the only option and certainly not obligatory. For example there are contests that exchange call and age, others exchange call and power, and so on. The long established QSO formats in WSJT-X abide by these guidelines in their various forms, particularly for weak signal working such as EME, MS, and other scatter modes where the strictly minimum exchange may be critical for successful QSOs in the most adverse conditions. 73 Bill G4WJS. On 11/05/2021 14:36, Russ wrote: Hello Jim. Are you saying that the rules for a complete QSO can be different for contests vs non-contest contacts? How can that be. I am sure that every active station who works a new grid or new country in a contest, adds that to his station totals, and expects to get a QSL card or LOTW confirmation. To have a contest where the rules allow contacts that are not valid for non-contest awards makes no sense at all. 73, Russ K2TXB -----Original Message----- From: Jim Brown <mailto:k...@audiosystemsgroup.com> <k...@audiosystemsgroup.com> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 5:17 PM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] FT4 logging prompt Indeed they are good contacts. W0YK is a leading contester, was part of getting FT4 and FT8 integrated with major RTTY contests. You guys are looking at things from the perspective of non-contesters. 73, Jim K9YC On 5/10/2021 7:34 AM, Russ wrote: Paul Kube wrote: 1. Answering a CQ: CQ WW W0YK DM97 Tx6 W0YK K6PO R DM12 Tx3 K6PO W0YK RR73 Tx4 2. Tailending a QSO. K6PO has already copied W0YK’s grid. Then: W1AW W0YK RR73 Tx4 W0YK K6PO R DM12 Tx3 K6PO W0YK RR73 Tx4 3. Tailending a QSO. K6PO has not yet copied W0YK’s grid. Then: W1AW W0YK RR73 Tx4 W0YK K6PO DM12 Tx2 K6PO W0YK R DM97 Tx3 W0YK K6PO RR73 These are NOT contacts!Contact rules specifically state that you must copy your call sign from your QSO partner before sending a report.Regardless of the fact that some misguided contest rules may allow ‘contacts’ in that form, those contacts would not be good for other awards (DXCC, VUCC, etc). Eliminating 73 – a bad idea.If I send 73 and the other guy receives it, then he knows it was a good contact.If I continue to send my report then he should know to continue sending RRR.Otherwise he may log a contact that was incomplete. 73, Russ K2TXB
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
