I think psychologists would have a field day analyzing:
PATIENT NUMBER ONE: those who must show-off their DXing prowess, copying
skills etc. by spotting someone else. "Oh Boy", fellas look who I've found
and worked, I'm so good, and I worked him before you did. And please
forgive me that I busted his call; I'm really not as good as I think I am",
and,
PATIENT NUMBER TWO: who are so incompetent that inwardly they cannot find
or copy jack, most probably must rely on PATIENT NUMBER ONE'S, and even if
they try to grow-up and be a big-shot PATIENT NUMBER ONE, they never can
quite 'cut the mustard', and live with an inferiority complex throughout
their DXing and contesting career. Oh they will try and pull their Big Boy
Pants on from from time-to-time, maybe even spot EK3LR..........only to be
publicly ridiculed by the few thousand who must say, "you idiot, how could
you not know K3LR", and further they spiral into depression.
Ah, packet, skimmers, RBN. Be careful for what you ask.
Vy 73
Jim Neiger N6TJ
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom W8JI
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 2:26 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Summarizing the Skimmer Accuracy Thread
I have just created a simple tool to create virtual logs and play with
busted calls.
Based on CQ WW CW 2012 public logs.
Enter any call and see how many people have it in their logs.
http://rate.pileup.ru/vlog.php?call=EK3LR
73!
Valery
R5GA
I don't feel sorry for anyone on this. No one should ever be working anyone,
spot or not, unless they actually identify the callsign. It's actually good
the skimmer and packet make bad spots and bust the people using skimmer or
the cluster to copy and log a callsign.
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|