- 1. [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "DickT-W0RAA" <dickt@w0raa.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:16:31 -0600
- Hi Don. I read your e-mail about the cheating and the SO2R op that was running on 2 bands at once. It seems that it's getting more blatant as each contest comes along. The mood seems to be "To hell w
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00171.html (7,248 bytes)
- 2. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: Cheryl Whitlock <cherwhit@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:31:08 -0500
- Don and all, Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests weekends as well. I don't see things chang
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00172.html (7,326 bytes)
- 3. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:32:41 -0700
- If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00177.html (7,720 bytes)
- 4. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: James Colville <jimw7ry@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:36:22 -0700
- Agreed Cheryl! I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CONTESTES... Or lump it together with some multi class. 73 Jim W7RY _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing lis
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00178.html (8,048 bytes)
- 5. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:13:24 -0400
- No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00180.html (10,162 bytes)
- 6. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: Cheryl Whitlock <cherwhit@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 15:19:33 -0500
- I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00182.html (9,022 bytes)
- 7. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "Martin Bluhm" <marty@w8aks.us>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:23:53 -0800
- Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On the cheating angle, I have to agree. This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months back. My feelings towa
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00183.html (11,515 bytes)
- 8. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "Mike Mellinger WA0SXV" <wa0sxv@mellinger.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 15:23:31 -0500
- Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate? I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep other operators off both of them. Regardless whic
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00184.html (8,494 bytes)
- 9. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: Cheryl Whitlock <cherwhit@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 15:27:41 -0500
- Mike, You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right? On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Mike Mellinger WA0SXV <wa0sxv@mellinger.com _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00185.html (8,169 bytes)
- 10. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:32:33 -0400
- That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same time but
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00186.html (10,034 bytes)
- 11. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:47:00 -0400
- Marty, Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to attack SO2R. And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere e
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00188.html (12,815 bytes)
- 12. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400
- There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number of transmitters
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00190.html (15,857 bytes)
- 13. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: James Colville <jimw7ry@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 14:35:22 -0700
- Sounds like there needs to be... After this last weekend. Stop the class warfare... Make SO2R a separate class. 73 Jim W7RY _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@cont
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00191.html (17,514 bytes)
- 14. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: Michael Haack <mikehaack@aim.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:49:36 -0500
- There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up against SO2R. Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air at any given time, but still you have the dis
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00193.html (7,731 bytes)
- 15. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "John Barber GW4SKA" <ska@bartg.org.uk>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:40:43 +0100
- Absolutely on the nail, Joe. Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way, regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear, report them to the contest m
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00195.html (12,528 bytes)
- 16. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:39:20 -0400
- "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00196.html (8,953 bytes)
- 17. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "John KLim" <n3khk_jk@verizon.net>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:55:22 -0400
- Just a joke friends. If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW they might be able to out scor
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00197.html (8,678 bytes)
- 18. Re: [RTTY] cheating (score: 1)
- Author: Michael Haack <mikehaack@aim.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:10:41 -0500
- Joe, If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station does not have a distinct advantage, Fine. Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single Transmitter Rule. C
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00198.html (8,408 bytes)
- 19. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:49:59 -0600
- Not all SO2 ops do this and there are lots of frequencies especially on CW. CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1 W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194 "A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you m
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00203.html (10,834 bytes)
- 20. Re: [RTTY] cheating (score: 1)
- Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400
- I'm not saying that it is not an advantage although there are single radio stations that regularly outscore two radio stations. A big part of the difference is still operator skill - a skilled opera
- /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00204.html (11,345 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu