CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] 6M CW

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 6M CW
From: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 11:14:18 -0700
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

I'm not a fan of FT8 for various reasons (mostly its constricted interface), but you realize that FT8 has encouraged more activity on the bands than just about anything else, right?  Many CWers moved to FT8 for its S/N advantages, but others moved to FT8 simply because it has far more activity (HF or VHF) than CW does.  And LOTS of the folks on FT8 would not be on CW if FT8 went away.

Calling FT8 an "existential threat to ham radio" is ludicrous no matter how much you or I may dislike it.  Anything that encourages lots of activity like FT8 does is exactly the opposite.

Dave   AB7E



On 10/25/2022 6:10 AM, James Cain wrote:
When FT-8 crawled out from under a rock a few years ago, I submitted a post
to cq-contest. The  reflector "monitor" rejected it. I called FT-8 an
"existential threat to amateur radio." Now, as the N6RO band/mode totals
bear witness, FTx is more than an existential threat, it is *reality*.

cain K1TN
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>