[WT-support] Win-Test and contest numbers, proposal

[Stein Roar LA6FJA-K3RAG]

I asked the Win-test crew last year about this weird way of QSO serial number...
The answer I got was they didn't plan to do it and suggested me to use another software if I  couldn't live with this feature..

Writelog have had this feature for years....

73 LA6FJA

> From: Wolfgang -DK9VZ- [ws at dk9vz.com]
> Sent: 2012-05-29 13:41:45 MEST
> To: support at win-test.com
> Subject: Re: [WT-support] Win-Test and contest numbers, proposal
> 
> Hey Tönno
> 
> yes you're right, I didn´t consider that there is another mode called SSB,
> which I normally don´t use and don´t like ;-))
> 
> So your proposal to increment SN only the callsign fileld is empty
> would be a very good solution in my view also.
> 
> It could lead to having sent the same number twice, but when both QSOs
> are logged with that same number and could be cross checked it wouldn´t 
> be a problem.
> A gap (a number without an assigned QSO) would not appear.
> 
> When can we have it? ;-))
> 
> /*73 de*/
> /*Wolfgang DK9VZ*/
> ws at dk9vz.com <mailto:ws at dk9vz.com>
> 
> 
> Am 29.05.2012 13:25, schrieb Tõnno Vähk:
> >
> > I see a very interesting and needed discussion here. We just completed 
> > another MS operation in WPX which now has one numbering sequence only 
> > and running with 5 stations you need all them to coordinate numbers. 
> > It is a mess as often the number is stolen from the RUN station or 
> > another station after it has given it out but before he has pressed 
> > Enter and then the wrong sent number gets into the log. We do use 
> > $NEXTSERIAL, etc... But a lot of human mistakes happen. And 
> > unfortunately it is the innocent caller who gets punished as he will 
> > lose the QSO because ?wrongly copied? exchange.
> >
> > I have seen the opinion of WT guys and solutions proposed and 
> > arguments presented to protect the current system. Well, obviously a 
> > critical mass of people have huge problems with this thing and we 
> > would need at least some optional solution. It is clear that none of 
> > the contest organizers require perfect line of numbers and what is 
> > important is that the numbers match in logs. So preserving a clean 
> > sequence is not an argument.
> >
> > Reserving the number somehow when it is sent does not quite work as in 
> > SSB it won?t work and even in CW some guys send with paddle, etc.. 
> > Bob?s idea abut the program checking what was sent and logging it is 
> > interesting but again not universal.
> >
> > It seems to me that the best option is to have a following tickable 
> > option in WT:
> >
> > ONLY INCREMENT SERIAL NUMBER WHEN CALLSIGN FIELD IS EMPTY
> >
> > That?s it. Let the station who has something on the callsign field 
> > keep the number. This way it can never happen that you log a different 
> > number from what is sent! If the QSO does not happen and you clear the 
> > callsign field the number gets immidiately synchronized again! Can 
> > someone point out when this solution would not work?
> >
> > If only it would not require rewriting the whole code of the program! 
> > Does it??
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Es5tv
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Support mailing list
> > support at win-test.com
> > http://lists.f5mzn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Support mailing list
> support at win-test.com
> http://lists.f5mzn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support