>Internal radiophysics.com LAN RFC 822 headers
>From evans@dablik Tue May 24 09:22:15 1994
>Return-Path: <evans@dablik>
>Received: from dablik by jupiter.RPI (4.1/SMI-4.1)
> id AA03445; Tue, 24 May 94 09:22:12 MDT
>Message-Id: <9405241522.AA03445@jupiter.RPI>
>X-Sender: evans@jupiter (Unverified)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>To: interput@dablik("in%""cq-contest@tgv.com""")
>From: evans@dablik (D. R. Evans)
>Subject: Re: CONTESTS
>X-Mailer: <PC Eudora Version 1.4>
>
>2. Novice round-up. Didn't know it was broken. If the no-coders
>need a contest, give them one. Don't mess up the round-up.
>The round-up could use something to encourage NON-novices to come
>work the novices.
>
For the first two or three years after I received my US call, I went on in
NR and tried to work several novices. NOT ONE of them could copy my
callsign; they all, without exception, tried to mangle it into a 1x3. (And
yes, I kept repeating it more and more slowly.) Eventually, I gave up in
disgust and have never tried again. I don't know what the moral of this is
(other than that I should get a 1x3 c/s) but it does explain why this
non-novice is never heard in NR any more.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Doc Evans NQ0I/G4AMJ : devans@orion.colorado.edu
al019@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------
>From Dave Curtis <dcurtis@mipos2.intel.com> Tue May 24 16:49:54 1994
From: Dave Curtis <dcurtis@mipos2.intel.com> (Dave Curtis)
Subject: CONTESTS
Message-ID: <9405241549.AA08715@climax.intel.com>
> >2. Novice round-up. Didn't know it was broken. If the no-coders
> >need a contest, give them one. Don't mess up the round-up.
> >The round-up could use something to encourage NON-novices to come
> >work the novices.
> >
>
> For the first two or three years after I received my US call, I went on in
> NR and tried to work several novices. NOT ONE of them could copy my
> callsign; they all, without exception, tried to mangle it into a 1x3. (And
> yes, I kept repeating it more and more slowly.) Eventually, I gave up in
> disgust and have never tried again. I don't know what the moral of this is
> (other than that I should get a 1x3 c/s) but it does explain why this
> non-novice is never heard in NR any more.
That doesn't match my experience. I think you had a run of bad luck.
-Dave NG0X
dcurtis@mipos2.intel.com
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Doc Evans NQ0I/G4AMJ : devans@orion.colorado.edu
> al019@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>From Steve Harrison <sharrison@sysplan.com> Tue May 24 17:25:38 1994
From: Steve Harrison <sharrison@sysplan.com> (Steve Harrison)
Subject: E-Mail Addresses
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9405241238.C14384-0100000@eagle.sysplan.com>
What's going on? Does EVERYBODY think everybody else knows everybody
else's E-Mail address? Please use your name, call and your e-mail address
at the end of a message! I've wanted to send personal to a number of guys
over the past several weeks, but could not; and out of consideration for
the others who would receive a general reply, didn't bother to reply.
Then, this morning, one e- shows up with only a call, and another doesn't
even have any signature!
You want replies to your comments/questions, do it right, please! This is
getting too informal!
73, Steve KO0U/4 <sharrison@sysplan.com>
>From Peter G. Smith" <n4zr@netcom.com Tue May 24 17:25:38 1994
From: Peter G. Smith" <n4zr@netcom.com (Peter G. Smith)
Subject: DSP Filters and Contesting
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9405240911.A22630-0100000@netcom8>
I'm looking for advice on the use (or usability) of DSP filters in CW
contesting. It would certainly help the fatigue factor on the low bands
if a DSP were usable for knocking down the background noise. Ads for the
new MFJ DSP filter talk about an LMS algorithm that they say can cut all
sorts of noise up to 20 db. while (implicitly) not narrowing the bandwidth
appreciably. Since I assume nobody has one of the MFJs yet, I guess I'm
just looking for general/theoretical comments on this claim (unless one of
the other DSPs now on the market uses a similar function). I would also
appreciate any comments on my assumption that the super-narrow filter
bandwidths allowed through DSP would be fundamentally useless for
contesting, even in S&P mode, because of the difficulty of quickly finding
and identifying calling stations.
73, Pete
n4zr@netcom.com
NOTE: New Address
>From Peter G. Smith" <n4zr@netcom.com Tue May 24 18:27:57 1994
From: Peter G. Smith" <n4zr@netcom.com (Peter G. Smith)
Subject: E-Mail Addresses
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9405241005.A7891-0100000@netcom9>
For convenience ... well, not really THAT convenient ... a relatively
complete list of all ham radio users of the Internet (based primarily on
USENET accesses) is available by ftp -- filename hams_on_usenet, in the
ham_radio directory on FTP server ftp.cs.buffalo.edu. The file is over
600k long but could presumably be inhaled by a word-processor or text
database and searched that way. If you don't have FTP service, you can
get it in 6 100-k messages from the USENET mailgroup radio.amateur.misc,
and the first message in that group also gives instructions for getting
the file e-mailed by a server.
73, Pete
n4zr@netcom.com
NOTE: New Address
On Tue, 24 May 1994, Steve Harrison wrote:
> What's going on? Does EVERYBODY think everybody else knows everybody
> else's E-Mail address? Please use your name, call and your e-mail address
> at the end of a message! I've wanted to send personal to a number of guys
> over the past several weeks, but could not; and out of consideration for
> the others who would receive a general reply, didn't bother to reply.
> Then, this morning, one e- shows up with only a call, and another doesn't
> even have any signature!
>
> You want replies to your comments/questions, do it right, please! This is
> getting too informal!
>
> 73, Steve KO0U/4 <sharrison@sysplan.com>
>
>
>
>From H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil@seattleu.edu Tue May 24 00:06:40 1994
From: H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil@seattleu.edu (H. Ward Silver)
Subject: WPX/CW 1993 Certificates ???
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9405231636.C10998-9100000@bach>
I believe that the certificates are SERIOUSLY behind, like a few years
worth (I'm still waiting for 1991 certificates), but heard that CQ
Magazine is stepping in to help out the committee. I think it's mostly
due to overload on the committee...
73, Ward N0AX
|