Well, heck yes Paul, it's a form of pile-up management. Not IMHO a good practice, nevertheless, it's there. But it's not recent, nor can it be blamed on the cluster or RBN. Those may exacerbate it, b
Problem is that the worse offenders either will never read "the list" or be made aware that they're on it... ...or proudly proclaim their presence on it as a Good Thing and a real honor (for their eg
I think the important point is that we copy what was sent. If the sending station has made an error, or what appears to be one, and it is a consistent one, note it in the comments when you send in yo
It seems to me that there are two related, but different, issues here. (1) Logging what was sent. IMHO, you log what was sent, even if it appears wrong. Maybe K0HB is visiting a relative and isn't op
I still use good ole' CTWIN 10. It reads contact frequency off of my Omni VI+ via the serial interface. When I'm using my Corsair, which does not have an RS-232 port, I manually select the band. Ther
I sure wish Frank had explained what he's been doing. All I know is that my cluster monitor used to be cluttered & virtually overwhelmed with W3LPL "spots" to the point of making it effectively usele
After going from WN3VAW to W3WN 5 1/2 years ago... my biggest problem isn't the length of the call, it's that W3WH & I are very often in the same pile-ups, and it's just a little too easy for someone
Pete, I don't know if it was because of Skimmer spots, or increased use of Packet, or what... But I did observe, especially on Sunday, that if there was a decent pileup on a station, especially if we
John Clarke KE4CRR has started a petition demanding that the ARRL remove the frequency range of 14.296 to 14.304 MHz from "al" contests to "protect" the operations of the Maritime Mobile Service Net
Well Tom, I just got an email from a Dr. E Browne, informing me that he's filing a protest. Something about a stolen DeLorean and misuse of a flux capacitor... Hi Mike Probably what he did is go to t
IMHO, there are three related issues here, all of which have been used on the corpse of the poor deceased horse at one time or another for years. Issue 1: Eligibility of Remote Controlled Station(s)
Well, that's the rub, isn't it? Understand before I say anything else that recognizing the issue(s) and potential pitfall(s) does not imply that either do or do not endorse this mode of operating or
I see where Paul's coming from. I disagree with him, in general, on the subject, but I see his point. Look: It is one thing if I run a remote station (however it's controlled), and identify myself in
John, I'm not sure if it's quite that simple. For one thing, for the printed issue, we (or at least the potential advertisers) would have to know what the page rate(s) are, whether this would increas
Sorry I'm late to the party. Pete, if I'm not mistaken, the contest rules require that all of the station's equipment must be within a finite area, right? If that is correct, then a remote receiver o
I think that's more a sad commentary on the state of security of most of our banking & financial institutions than it is an indictment of Logbook of the World for being "too secure." 73 I think LOTW
Well Mike, I'm very glad you've never had a problem with your financial institution. I have, albeit relatively small, and I know of people who've had major problems. The reality is that more financia
Dick, With all due respect, I don't think that the problem is the 'vague wording of the rules.' On the contrary, I think "the rules", as a whole, are pretty clear. FCC rules state that you can not op