[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] QSX frequency

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] QSX frequency
From: "David Robbins K1TTT" <k1ttt@arrl.net>
Reply-to: k1ttt@arrl.net
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 17:58:42 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
No, as I pointed out 'up' doesn't help the spot grabbers since the software
doesn't know what to do and won't set the split, so you still end up with
callers on the tx frequency.

David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tree
> Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 16:11
> To: k1ttt@arrl.net
> Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] QSX frequency
> > There is just one problem with your argument against spotting the qsx
> > frequency... if it isn't sent then stations just grabbing the spot and
> not
> > listening before calling will call on you tx frequency making it so
> other
> > stations who know the split can't hear you.  Many people are dependent
> on
> > the qsx for setting the split now, and many programs add it
> automatically,
> > so its really better to send it than not to... even if the dx doesn't
> stay
> > there long afterwards at least it gets everyone blindly grabbing spots
> and
> > calling into the split mode to start with.
> I think the suggestion already made to just say "UP" takes care of this
> issue
> without creating the problem I was describing.
> Agree?
> Tree
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>