I just picked up the 70-300VR myself, also for a D50. I already had the 18-70mm AF-S and 50mm f.18D in my bag.
For months I wrestled with the concept of buying a used 80-200mm f2.8D but, in the end, I simply was not prepared to handle a lens of that size/weight (1.3kg) as my only tele-zoom. Sure, i'd love to have one for a few events I attend each year, but I felt it's size/weight would be prohibitive in too many other scenarios for which i'd still want the reach. So, right now, the 70-300mm VR is a perfect fit. It's small/light enough for travel or walking/hiking and will perform quite well in at least 90% of the conditions in which I shoot/need the reach. I'm also finding VR to be a nice addition given that this isn't exactly fast glass. At some point, I will revisit the concept of an xx-xxx f2.8, but that will be down the road and when i'm willing to use the equipment in a fashion where it pays for itself.
Right now, this is just a personal hobby with the odd favour here and there. I have no requirement for professional equipment.
Anyway, i'm quite pleased with the purchase. The build quality meets or exceeds that of the 18-70mm and the lens performs well right up to to it's maximum focal length.
OP, If you're happy with the IQ and feel of the 18-55mm kit lens, then you can probably save some $$$ and go with the 55-200mm VR. On the other hand, for a little more, the 70-300mm VR will give some added reach (105-450mm on a body with DX format sensor), will AF/MF like a proper AF-S lens should (no switch to flick) and I suspect it offers better build quality (metal mount).