I also fell victim to numerous DX stations that just would not ID unless asked to during this past weekend's contest. I believe this is all due to the instant pileups that ensue after the DX station
Once you use packet, you're relying on other operators to assist your own "single-operator" efforts. Packet has no limits or boundaries. I think its use, even in multi-op entries, is against the spir
Negative. This changes nothing you were complaining about in your message. Your suggestion actually makes what you are complaining about worse. SOAB+ is a viable category. It's just not attracting a
I beg to differ. Please do not assume that everybody can (or want) to access a packet cluster. If one see fit to use a cluster in the contest, he/she can always enter SO/assisted category. I assume t
I don't think it is the sole reason, although probably makes it worse. In this case I just call 'em and if it's a dupe, it's a dupe. I'd encourage you to do the same. Maybe we can change the behavior
On 10/28/97 7:48, Ramirez, Kenneth (EXCH) at KRAMIREZ@intermedia.com wrote: The problem with this suggestion, Ken, is that it assumes everyone has packet available, and they simply are choosing to us
I disagree, for several reasons: 1) No matter how you cut it, packet spotting is assistance. If a station wishes to use that advantage, good for them, but stations who eschew the advantage should no
Yes, I think it does matter. Suppose you get on the SS contest this weekend, and are happily running a long list of W8's on 40M, rate meter up around 120. VE8CM picks that time to come to his shack a
<< >I haven't seen where the use of packet in assisted Old subject, Ken. It has in some cases. IMHO it SHOULD in ALL CASES given EQUAL operators, stations and propagation. It's only logical. >> Well,
If a person uses packet all the time, how are they every going to learn how to tune the band and look for mults? What if the 2 meter radio quits? Shut down?? I think it would be awful boring to sit a
I think it would be a mistake to make the rules change N4UK asks for. I agree with Jeff. I don't even have access to packet spotting, and there are many others of us in rural areas in that same situa
Even if it would have no effect on the competitive balance (fat chance), it would be a real psychological disadvantage to know I was operating against a bunch of packet assisted guys. I have no acce
Not for me BUT if it ever happened I can envision this new thread in the future where we discuss the REQUIRMENT that everyone HAS to connect up to packet and then there will be the packet police to m
I also fell victim to numerous DX stations that just would not ID unless asked to during this past weekend's contest. I believe this is all due to the instant pileups that ensue after the DX station
I don't think it is the sole reason, although probably makes it worse. In this case I just call 'em and if it's a dupe, it's a dupe. I'd encourage you to do the same. Maybe we can change the behavior
I also fell victim to numerous DX stations that just would not ID unless asked to during this past weekend's contest. I believe this is all due to the instant pileups that ensue after the DX station
I don't think it is the sole reason, although probably makes it worse. In this case I just call 'em and if it's a dupe, it's a dupe. I'd encourage you to do the same. Maybe we can change the behavior
Well, I have to throw in my 2 cents worth, couldn't hold back any more. First, there's definitely more of a sense of accomplishment without packet. And I've found that not operating with packet certa
Hi Larry. I have to agree with you 100 percent! In the December 1996 CQ magazine John Dorr, K1AR, put it well. And I quote "How about our dear friend packet radio? It's my hope that packet radio syst