You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
First off, everything went quite well, save for discovering bug #464 (already fixed).
I just submitted my log and the program was counting 56 sections but the ARRL robot returned a count of 54. It didn't provide a list so I'm not sure if the error was a typo on my end or not. I do recall that upon working KG4W that it was recorded as a multiplier for KG4 despite entering VA in the Exchange field. I even went back and edited the QSO but I think the mult count remained the same. Scanning through the log doesn't reveal any obvious typos, and I only recall editing that one erroneous mult, though there might have been another I don't recall.
I knew for certain I had at least one dupe in the log, the robot removed what appeared to me to be two Qs. But then the mix up with KG4W might account for that difference.
Overall, I am pleased with the performance of the program. I didn't have a very large log--just over 250--and throughout the event the program was responsive and never lagged that I could see. Thanks for your efforts, Mike!
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
First off, everything went quite well, save for discovering bug #464 (already fixed).
I just submitted my log and the program was counting 56 sections but the ARRL robot returned a count of 54. It didn't provide a list so I'm not sure if the error was a typo on my end or not. I do recall that upon working
KG4Wthat it was recorded as a multiplier forKG4despite enteringVAin the Exchange field. I even went back and edited the QSO but I think the mult count remained the same. Scanning through the log doesn't reveal any obvious typos, and I only recall editing that one erroneous mult, though there might have been another I don't recall.I knew for certain I had at least one dupe in the log, the robot removed what appeared to me to be two Qs. But then the mix up with
KG4Wmight account for that difference.Overall, I am pleased with the performance of the program. I didn't have a very large log--just over 250--and throughout the event the program was responsive and never lagged that I could see. Thanks for your efforts, Mike!
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions