Yuri: I appreciate your comments, so let me say this.
You need to have a pretty thick skin to post on some of these
boards. It doesn't matter whether it is ham radio, fishing or stock
chatboards. They are all pretty much the same. If you voice an opinion
that appears to be counter to the group thinking, most likely, you are going
to get flamed, sometimes flamed big time.
When and if this happens, I would strongly suggest that you just let
it slide. Getting upset or posting a nasty-o-gram simply does no good.
Just one man's opinion.
73
Bernard, WA4OEJ
----- Original Message -----
From: <K3BU@aol.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 7:39 PM
Subject: [TenTec] Re: About the incivility of our posts
> In a message dated 2/26/04 1:39:30 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> w1ael@mindspring.com writes:
> >>That said, at least a few of us have felt that some of your notes were
> somewhat ill-tempered (not to mention technically deficient - sorry) and
> we responded in kind. <<
>
> OK, let me elaborate.
> I am for exchange of ideas, arguments, discussing problems, explaining or
> learning.
> What I did, I presented my opinion on receiver sensitivity and need for it
> going down to 160. Right now at my home QTH I have simple antennas, but I
> designed and operated my Razor beams (Quad-Yagi see
> http://members.aol.com/ve3bmv/Razors.htm) and low bands from VE1ZZ QTH. I
placed in the top spots in the
> contests. I saw and used the need for maximum sensitivity when using high
> performance antennas (beaming JA with Razors, the band noise drops to
ZERO, thanks to
> sharp pattern and discrimination against noise around). My modified Drake
R4B
> is somewhere < 0.1 uV and I needed to crank it up for full sensitivity in
many
> situations. I related that as requirement by contesters. Ten-Tec is aiming
> Orion at contesters. There was a discussion about not needing the
sensitivity on
> low bands. I am relating and pointing out that there is a need and rig
should
> not be crippled just because "average ham has noise on low bands" using
> "normal" antennas. Can you point out any other rig that cripples the
sensitivity on
> low bands to make it sound "quiet"?
>
> Instead of arguing or exploring why do we need sensitivity, you flatly
> dismiss me and my reasoning. Just like W4PA knows better that we do not
need PTT
> line on the mike connector for CW. Instead of just leaving it there, the
Orion
> was "improved" in a such way that even Ten-Tec can't bring it back. That's
where
> "they know better" comes from. Then the remarks that Orion is not for me
> (because I am so backward?) I have been creaming world records and
designed
> equipment long before Scott got smell of burning transformers.
>
> My reference to "TT cult" applies to those who blindly defend shortcomings
> and problems and attack those who bring the attention to deficiencies and
> request improvement or provide suggestions. You cultists do not see the
improvements
> and better radios as a result of our comments. If you are happy with
status
> quo, then fine, but do not push and advertise something for contesters,
when
> the contesters tell you what is wrong or what could/should be improved if
you
> want us to keep buying TT radios.
>
> Are you happy with banging power meter? With "hang time" on the meter? I
see
> it is the "feature" - it was "improved", made longer in the first
published
> software update. Why in the world do I want the meter to sit there, not
moving
> when I am talking or sending CW? I want to see the meter to move as the
signal
> is going out, so I can judge the average power, make sure there are no
> oscillations or too much background noise. Then the power calibration,
manual says
> 5%, linear scale on the meter is way off. Takes 5c scale and adjusting the
meter
> range to about 130W to avoid banging to the stop. This is not rocket
science,
> this is known since first meters were around. Is it worthy $3.6k radio?
Not
> in my book. I will bet that meters will be at some point breaking or
bending
> their needles, they can only take so much.
>
> The point is that world has progressed, if Ten-Tec wants to cater to
serious
> operator's market, then they better try to keep up with competition.
Dollar
> improvement here and there can make huge difference. Otherwise they will
be
> sentenced to the "homebrewy" category - curiosity. That's why TT radios
were not
> flooding contester's shacks in past. You wanna keep it as the radio for
cultist
> that will praise doesn't matter what? Fine, it is there. You wanna have it
> truly top notch, contester's prime rig, then lot of stuff should be
addressed.
> Personal tirades and ridicules will not achieve that. You will only repel
those
> who would be potential customers and want to see the TT radios succeed.
> Competition doesn't sleep.
> Internet is a great thing, but sometimes few rotten apples can spoil it
for
> others. Why should I argue and take snotty remarks, if I can pick subject,
> write nice article, (get paid) and let those who appreciate it, enjoy it.
Those
> who don't, can skip it.
>
> In the past, I was rather selfish, I kept the modification and
developments
> to myself, trying to have an edge over others in the contests. It worked,
my
> results prove it. Now, when I am trying to help and share some of my
expertise,
> I get what I get. I really do not need this, sorry that at the times I
might
> seem a bit harsh, but I bite back.
> This is one more attempt at shedding some light in hope that some people
will
> wake up from the cult euphoria. Enjoy whatever turns you on, I mean it
> generally.
>
> You goys want to discuss topics in a civil manner, I am here and I gladly
> help and share what I know. Many can attest to that in our private
exchanges. You
> want to ad hominem remarks, I am outta here.
>
> 73 Yuri
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|