Doesn't matter whether you believe in them or not. Fact is that people are
using them to make hundreds of CW QSOs in major contests. This is not a bad
thing, but does explain why some guys have trouble when you ask them a
question or for a repeat.
CW contesting is fun. SSB contesting is fun. RTTY contesting is fun.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com
> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Alex Malyava
> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 8:29 PM
> To: José Nunes CT1BOH
> Cc: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Article on CW in the Wall St Journal today,
> I, personally, do not believe in CW decoders.
> So far I have not seen any "perfect" decoder capable of
> decoding weak cw under strong qrm/qrn.
> The best, I think, is MRP40, but it is not any better than
> human brain.
> 2007/10/8, José Nunes CT1BOH <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> > There seems to be this constant talking about keeping CW alive.
> > The way it is going it will never die.
> > CW contest attract more and more participants than ever.
> > Why? Surely I don't see more people learning the code. What
> I see it
> > more and more people using CW decoders.
> > This last CQWW CW from CT3NT I was called on CW by many SSB only
> > operators.
> > CW will become a sort of RTTY mode for those who cannot or
> do not want
> > to learn it, but want to enjoy the advantages of CW.
> > 73
> > --
> > José Nunes
> > CONTEST CT1BOH - http://www.qsl.net/ct1boh
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list