After answering the first I decided not to answer the others. Reinforcing bad
behavior is not good. Hopefully we can present a united approach to maintain
good procedures.
73
Ed, AI6O
rtty-request@contesting.com wrote:
>Send RTTY mailing list submissions to
> rtty@contesting.com
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> rtty-request@contesting.com
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
> rtty-owner@contesting.com
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of RTTY digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Fonts, mostly off topic (Kok Chen)
> 2. Exchanges (edfelter@cox.net)
> 3. Re: Exchanges (Kok Chen)
> 4. Re: Exchanges (Ron Kolarik)
> 5. Re: Exchanges (Bill, W6WRT)
> 6. Re: Exchanges (David Levine)
> 7. Re: Exchanges (Tom Osborne)
> 8. Re: Exchanges (Ron Kolarik)
> 9. NAQP RTTY AC0C Single Op LP (Jeff Blaine)
> 10. NAQP (Dick White)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:14:04 -0700
>From: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Fonts, mostly off topic
>To: RTTY Reflector <rtty@contesting.com>
>Cc: iw1ayd <iw1ayd@googlemail.com>
>Message-ID: <0952C615-E02D-4A85-A4B1-AC4F9002BE00@mac.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
>
>On Jul 17, 2011, at 1:18 PM, iw1ayd wrote:
>
>> Monaco on several M*S W*S PC's here around.
>
>Monaco is an old typeface that debut on the first Macintosh in 1984.
>
>The original Macintosh came with a bunch of fonts that were named after
>cities. There were Geneva, Chicago, New York, etc.
>
>In about 1987, Apple developed TrueType and converted the old bitmapped fonts
>to scalable Truetype. Subsequently, Apple licensed the TrueType technology to
>Microsoft, which has become the resident font technology today in Windows. So
>I am not surprised that many of the TrueType fonts are usable on both Windows
>and Mac OS. At least, the format conversion should be relatively easy.
>
>The Chicago font was used even quite recently, like on the third generation
>iPod. Monaco is still a defacto "standard" fixed width font on Macintoshes
>today.
>
>Chuck Bigelow did the bitmap to TrueType conversion for Monaco and you can
>read about the effort here:
>
>http://cajun.cs.nott.ac.uk/compsci/epo/papers/volume4/issue3/ep050cb.pdf
>
>In the above article, he mentioned:
>
>> The zero has a diagonal slash through the centre, which effectively
>> differentiates it from
>> the capital ?O? in a manner common in older terminals, but the zero slash
>> does not protrude
>> from the body of the letter, which distinguishes zero from O-slash.
>
>As you can see, there was a conscious effort to make zero distinguishable not
>just from "oscar" but also from the Scandinavian slashed-O.
>
>Bigelow received a MacArthur Foundation "Genius" award for his font work back
>in the mid-1980s and he is the original designer of the Lucida family of
>fonts; first used by the Scientific American periodical. Today, Lucida Grande
>is the Macintosh system font.
>
>73
>Chen, W7AY
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:52:06 -0700
>From: <edfelter@cox.net>
>Subject: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: rtty@contesting.com
>Message-ID: <20110717175206.OVLY2.1222783.imail@fed1rmwml41>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
>After my CQ, I noticed several stations answering with their call and their
>contest exchange on their first transmission. Several years ago I saw this
>develope in the early PSK contests, but didn't think much about it. I spent
>only about 4 hours (102 Qs) in the NAQP but saw enough instances of this "new"
>protocol to give it some thought. I would answer with my report but also
>would quickly remove the last callsign and <RXC> and hit my TU QRZ macro to
>hold frequency.
>
>Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol? I'll change my macros
>according if so. Just curious!
>
>73,
>
>Ed, AI6O
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 15:01:30 -0700
>From: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: RTTY Reflector <rtty@contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <B627BBCB-DA44-4A1B-9DD0-E699057ED166@mac.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>
>
>On Jul 17, 2011, at 2:52 PM, edfelter@cox.net wrote:
>> After my CQ, I noticed several stations answering with their call and their
>> contest exchange on their first transmission.
>
>The good thing about free sound card modems is that it *democratizes* digital
>modes for the masses so that anyone can operate in RTTY.
>
>The bad thing about free sound card modems is that it democratizes digital
>modes for the masses so that *anyone* can operate in RTTY.
>
>73
>Chen, W7AY
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 17:13:24 -0500
>From: "Ron Kolarik" <rkolarik@neb.rr.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: <rtty@contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <EB7C7660C515408BAA3F2D96C84723C6@atom1>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
>I just don't answer them and CQ again. Don't encourage the behaviour and it
>will eventually stop.....maybe. It's a good way to lose your run frequency to
>someone
>that wants points at all costs....only happened to me once, you want my points
>play the game right :)
>
>Ron
>K0IDT
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <edfelter@cox.net>
>To: <rtty@contesting.com>
>Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 4:52 PM
>Subject: [RTTY] Exchanges
>
>
>> After my CQ, I noticed several stations answering with their call and their
>> contest
>> exchange on their first transmission. Several years ago I saw this develope
>> in the
>> early PSK contests, but didn't think much about it. I spent only about 4
>> hours (102
>> Qs) in the NAQP but saw enough instances of this "new" protocol to give it
>> some
>> thought. I would answer with my report but also would quickly remove the
>> last
>> callsign and <RXC> and hit my TU QRZ macro to hold frequency.
>>
>> Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol? I'll change my macros
>> according
>> if so. Just curious!
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Ed, AI6O
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 15:20:42 -0700
>From: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: rtty@contesting.com
>Message-ID: <ann627dhi36ic72pour0lh24pvkgo5dmlu@4ax.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
>On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:52:06 -0700, <edfelter@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol?
>
>REPLY:
>
>I hope not. The calling station should never send his exchange until he knows
>the CQ station has his call right. If the CQ station has it wrong and logs his
>exchange, sends the TU message and goes on to another QSO, it becomes VERY
>difficult to straighten it out.
>
>If the CQ station has the call wrong, the S&P station should just keep sending
>his call ONLY until the CQ station has it right.
>
>73, Bill W6WRT
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 18:57:53 -0400
>From: David Levine <david@levinecentral.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: edfelter@cox.net
>Cc: rtty@contesting.com
>Message-ID:
> <CAGu77J-cJRgVZgLAoagrQ2qM4Tp7XE5e80HW1QscFreTdGoqhA@mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>Ed,
>
>I use N1MM and there are some real neat features but once in a while, if I'm
>not paying attention and do something out of sequence, where N1MM thinks I
>am in the exchange is different then where I really am. It's not N1MM's
>fault but my fault and as I use the features more, it becomes less of a
>problem. In fact, I know I blew it when I was working Ed, W0YK, and the
>cursor was in the wrong field. The 2 "oops" that happen are instead of
>sending my own call or report it sends AGN? AGN? or it might send my
>exchange vs my call.
>
>Maybe in the 366 contacts I made there were 8-10 "oops" moments. Not sure if
>that factors into what you experienced, but it could at least add to the
>reason.
>
>73,
>K2DSL - David
>
>On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 5:52 PM, <edfelter@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> After my CQ, I noticed several stations answering with their call and their
>> contest exchange on their first transmission. Several years ago I saw this
>> develope in the early PSK contests, but didn't think much about it. I spent
>> only about 4 hours (102 Qs) in the NAQP but saw enough instances of this
>> "new" protocol to give it some thought. I would answer with my report but
>> also would quickly remove the last callsign and <RXC> and hit my TU QRZ
>> macro to hold frequency.
>>
>> Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol? I'll change my macros
>> according if so. Just curious!
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Ed, AI6O
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 16:06:18 -0700
>From: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@frontier.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: "RTTY" <rtty@contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <EEDECBA80A654A9287FA1783AD0EBBFC@Tom>
>
>These are probably newbie operators that don't know better.
>
>What is better, blow them off, or explain to them the correct method of
>operating.
>
>Someone mentioned on the reflector before to keep a list of offending
>stations, and after the contest, send them an email *polite* and expain that
>what they were doing was not the norm.
>
>Next time they will probably be more apt to give you contact then if you
>just ignore them and hope they go away. 73
>
>Tom W7WHY
>
>
>>Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol?
>
>REPLY:
>
>I hope not. The calling station should never send his exchange until he
>knows
>the CQ station has his call right. If the CQ station has it wrong and logs
>his
>exchange, sends the TU message and goes on to another QSO, it becomes VERY
>difficult to straighten it out.
>
>If the CQ station has the call wrong, the S&P station should just keep
>sending
>his call ONLY until the CQ station has it right.
>
>73, Bill W6WRT
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 8
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 18:29:53 -0500
>From: "Ron Kolarik" <rkolarik@neb.rr.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@frontier.com>, "RTTY" <rtty@contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <E900EB87EF9C44ABBF2C877F29B854EB@atom1>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=response
>
>Tom, I don't blow them off. If I get the information exchange
>the first pass I'll CQ again and if the same thing happens then
>I have a macro for "your call pse k0idt". There have been to many
>times when the information exchange was for a close station and
>not my pipsqueak signal that I came up with the macro in self
>defense :)
>
>Ron
>k0idt
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@frontier.com>
>To: "RTTY" <rtty@contesting.com>
>Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 6:06 PM
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>
>
>> These are probably newbie operators that don't know better.
>>
>> What is better, blow them off, or explain to them the correct method of
>> operating.
>>
>> Someone mentioned on the reflector before to keep a list of offending
>> stations, and after the contest, send them an email *polite* and expain that
>> what they were doing was not the norm.
>>
>> Next time they will probably be more apt to give you contact then if you
>> just ignore them and hope they go away. 73
>>
>> Tom W7WHY
>>
>>
>>>Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol?
>>
>> REPLY:
>>
>> I hope not. The calling station should never send his exchange until he
>> knows
>> the CQ station has his call right. If the CQ station has it wrong and logs
>> his
>> exchange, sends the TU message and goes on to another QSO, it becomes VERY
>> difficult to straighten it out.
>>
>> If the CQ station has the call wrong, the S&P station should just keep
>> sending
>> his call ONLY until the CQ station has it right.
>>
>> 73, Bill W6WRT
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 9
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 19:39:50 -0500
>From: "Jeff Blaine" <keepwalking188@yahoo.com>
>Subject: [RTTY] NAQP RTTY AC0C Single Op LP
>To: "RTTY Reflector" <rtty@contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <FA7621FB95DA4D7683852DD260B802C0@8710w>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> North American QSO Party, RTTY - July
>
>Call: AC0C
>Operator(s): AC0C
>Station: AC0C
>
>Class: Single Op LP
>QTH: Kansas
>Operating Time (hrs): 9:45
>
>Summary:
>Band QSOs Mults
>-------------------
> 80: 42 22
> 40: 239 46
> 20: 237 37
> 15: 0 0
> 10: 0 0
>-------------------
>Total: 518 105 Total Score = 54,908
>
>Club: Kansas City DX Club
>
>Team:
>
>Comments:
>
>Eq: SO2V FTdx-5000MP and an array of attic mounted mono-banders. Unassisted.
>
>Got a late start as our final coordination meeting leading to next weekend's
>W0DXCC convention overlapped the contest start (us RTTY guys just can't get no
>respect!).
>
>Ran on one main VFO and S&P on the 2nd VFO looking for mults and guys I had not
>worked. Without the telnet feed, catching the mults was tough. Fortunately,
>10
>and 15 were dead here making the band selection quite a bit easier. hi hi.
>
>Pleased with results on 20 & 40. Especially on 40m - with antenna improvements
>paying off on that band.
>
>Even with the receiving loop on 80m, it was tough to keep a decent rate going
>even with the SO2V combo. Band noise was tough and the transmit antenna on 80m
>is marginal.
>
>SO2V is a huge step up from SO1R. And guys not running this are really missing
>out if their rig is capable of it. My score is weak from a mult standpoint,
>but
>the Q count is pretty good and that would not have been possible without the
>SO2V op mode. While SO2V is not SO2R, it's also easy to implement as it
>requires only the additional AF to PC feed for sub-VFO equipped rigs.
>
>This contest run was mostly a good chance to check out the FT5K in SO2V mode so
>I could contrast it to the FT2K. The FT2K is really smooth in SO2V and by
>comparison, has far better ergonomics for SO2V for a couple of reasons. The 2K
>has a dedicated RIT knob (on the 5K, the VFO-B and RIT share the same knob).
>SO2V on the 5K is workable on RTTY, but I dont' think in CW it would be
>efficient for this reason.
>
>The most troublesome quirk in RTTY SO2V is the unnecessary limits on the filter
>bandwidths requiring manipulation of the A/B, NAR/WIDE and WIDTH buttons in
>order to fine tune VFO-B width. A big step backward from the 2K for this
>reason specifically.
>
>Fortunately plans here for the fall include moving from the current SO2V to a
>SO2R config. The FT2K will be taking anchor position on the key 20/40m bands.
>Lot of work to be done by September!
>
>73/jeff/ac0c
>www.ac0c.com
>
>
>Posted using 3830 Score Submittal Forms at:
>http://www.hornucopia.com/3830score/
>______________________________________________
>3830 mailing list
>3830@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/3830
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 10
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 20:53:40 -0500
>From: "Dick White" <whiter26@sbcglobal.net>
>Subject: [RTTY] NAQP
>To: "RTTY Contesting" <rtty@contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <GCEHIONANEIKLALFAGJOGELNFAAA.whiter26@sbcglobal.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>I made 175 Q's in the NAQP in my 3.5 hours I worked the contest. 17 on 80,
>22 on 40 and 136 on 20 meters with 60 mults.
>
>N1MM worked great. 44 were 1st time calls. Maybe we are getting some new
>blood into RTTY contesting. I had two operator error problems due to hitting
>the wrong key. I use 250 and 500 Hz filters, depending on how crowded the
>band is. I had about 10 or so callers who were just on the edge of my band
>pass that I could not copy. I continued to call CQ until they either tuned
>in my signal properly or went away. All of us should make sure we are tuned
>in on the callers frequency. All in all, I think the contesters were well
>behaved and made the usual unavoidable errors.
>
>73 Dick KS0M
>
>Richard C. "Dick" White
>Fulton, Missouri 65251 U.S.A.
>whiter26@sbcglobal.net
>
>"We make a living by what we do.
> We make a life by what we give."
> Winston Churchill
>
>Amateur Radio Station: KS0M
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>RTTY mailing list
>RTTY@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
>End of RTTY Digest, Vol 103, Issue 25
>*************************************
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|