Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 20:20:56 -0500
I fully agree with you Joe. To a point... Unfortunately, now that the Skimmer technology has progressed to a "networked" stage, I could not, in all good conscience, differentiate it from the cluster.
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:53:53 -0500
To me, this is the crux of the matter. Nowhere in any rule that I have ever read does it state that CW MUST be copied by ear. As far as I'm concerned, "DX Alerting Assistance" has always been equate
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 10:23:05 -0500
The biggest advantage I see coming from the CW Skimmer is the ability for a single operator to operate a M/M station alone. Set up a CW Skimmer on each of the bands. Bounce from band to band picking
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:50:50 -0500
OK, I'll take a shot at it. This is a hard one because there is so much that needs to be defined and spelled out these days. I took a basic approach to not direct my efforts so much at CW Skimmer but
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:21:35 -0500
I've made that suggestion numerous times. If you can't define it, get rid of it. Seems simple enough to me. 73 -- Paul VO1HE _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:56:12 -0500
Another possibility would be to create a non-competing team of middle-of-the-pack ops (possibly a couple guys who just missed out), set them up with Skimmer in WRTC where they otherwise follow the sa
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 12:26:24 -0500
Yet, here we are. There are many who want to deem this, and other, new technology "assistance" because it helps an operator make contacts more efficiently. This can be said of much of the already ac
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 16:54:20 -0500
Hi Kelly, Not so. A local Skimmer tells me what MY station can hear but the Cluster tells me what others can hear. Moreover, it requires action on the part of another person to feed me that informati
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:29:17 -0800
Does sitting on a county line require separate QSOs for each mult in the QSO party? I would imagine so seeing it would be hard for logging software to issue 2 mults in 1 QSO so, if that's the case, t
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:17:32 -0800
I agree. Why is this such a huge issue. It says in the rules that the call must be given in the exchange so why can't this just be accepted? It's simply worded and very concise.. the way rules should
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 05:22:59 -0800
Exactly. I would just like to see the rules well written and followed. If the rule says the exchange is your hat size and your house address number, then give your hat size and house address number.
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 05:23:06 -0800
Precisely, Mark. To quote the rule, 4. Exchange: The required exchange consists of: 4.1. A consecutive serial number; 4.2. Precedence; 4.2.1. "Q" for Single Op QRP (5 Watts output or less); 4.2.2. "A
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:29:39 -0800
Are you saying that W1MX running in the SS next year will cause a collapse of society as we know it?? Maybe this also ties in with the end of the Mayan calendar on Dec 21, 2012. That year, as soon as
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:18:55 -0800
This is all making my Mayan Calendar theory seem rather plausible :) 73 -- Paul VO1HE _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.co
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:11:18 -0800
the call in the exchange may solve a lot of issues. I worked 3 stations and got 7 reports; 3 real ones and 4 from other stations on the same freqs who I wasn't calling. Going to be fun :) 73 -- Paul
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 05:53:01 -0800
This is correct. Finding another frequency is almost impossible but there's another way to help solve the problem... Give your callsign more often and don't rely on the cluster to do it for you. Anyo
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 06:21:40 -0800
I think the point is "Why can't the running station give his call more often?" How could it be a waste of time to verify the call of the station you're calling? You'd still have to wait for him to gi
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 06:22:06 -0800
I agree. That's the same as saying any section with more than, say, 25 operators in it should be considered worked by default. If everyone can get a sweep, the contest becomes meaningless. 73 -- Paul
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 11:25:12 -0800
Like I said before... What's wrong with a random number? Your logging program issues one that you pass on to the other station and his does the same for him to send to you. No more mindless 59 5 or e
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:25:40 -0800
True, but, on average, how many Qs in a contest station's log are from raw non-contesters? The bulk are from stations that have previously been in at least one contest and have some interest and know