Small Keyboards

[bsimonson at comcastpc.com]

I think there was discussion about small CONTEST keyboards on the reflector.
 I was just reading a catalog that has a MicroType Space Saver 10.75" x 6.0"
x 2.6" 100 key keyboard.  It is being sold for $119.95 from Dartek (800)
832-7835

Good luck if anyone is interested. (I have no commercial, financial, or
other interest in the keyboard or distributor, etc.)

Beryl

Beryl D. Simonson KE3GA   
H(610) 664-0549 bsimonson at comcastpc.com
O(215) 765-4600 bsimonson at slfcpa.com
Frankford Radio Club


>From John Watson <jwatson at unix.cde.com>  Tue Apr  9 06:05:13 1996
From: John Watson <jwatson at unix.cde.com> (John Watson)
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 22:05:13 -0700
Subject: Yaesu Reflector update
References: <Pine.BSD/.3.91.960408153611.20887B-100000 at paris.akorn.net>
Message-ID: <3169F009.9E4 at unix.cde.com>

Hi Bill;
        The idea of a Yaesu reflector is very interesting ,as I own a
FT-990. Please count me in as wanting to take part in the reflector.

                             John  KC4TBH
-- 
***********************************************************************************
    John Watson         E-Mail Address:  jwatson at unix.cde.com   
      KC4TBH               DX,DX,DX.... Any Questions?       
   11113 Camp St.                                        
    Leesburg, Fl.                                            
   34788-4350                                          
***********************************************************************************

>From Brian McGinness <wa3wjd at wirelessinc.com>  Tue Apr  9 08:08:56 1996
From: Brian McGinness <wa3wjd at wirelessinc.com> (Brian McGinness)
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 02:08:56 EST
Subject: Proposed New Contest Exchange
Message-ID: <199604090105.VAA03838 at thehub.knight-hub.com>

** Reply to note from aa4lr at radio.org 04/05/96 10:19am -0400

> The difference here is that currently, copying 59(9) has no intrinsic
> value. Since everyone sends 59, you can't tell if you are loud or weak, or
> what conditions are like at the other end.

Yes, BUT... If the QSO is to count for DXCC, then a signal report, however
inaccurate, must be exchanged.

Since a lot of the little guys are out there looking for DXCC contacts,
regardless of the type of contest, removing the signal report would be a
big mistake.

Lets leave the rules alone. If there is not a compelling reason to do so,
they should not be changed.

73, Brian



******************************
* Brian McGinness WA3WJD     *
* wa3wjd at wirelessinc.com     *
* Potomac Valley Radio Club  *
******************************


>From David Sarkozi <dsarkozi at infocom.net>  Tue Apr  9 03:21:49 1996
From: David Sarkozi <dsarkozi at infocom.net> (David Sarkozi)
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 21:21:49 -0500
Subject: Contest exchanges, why we send them.
Message-ID: <199604090221.VAA12267 at login1.infocom.net>

At 08:30 PM 4/8/96 -0600, you wrote:
>> The none data signal report does serve a purpose. It is an "announcer" that
>> means something like "here's the data that your going to copy". When you
>> hear "59 Texas" the 59 tells you the information is next.
>> 
>But isn't that just like saying 'please copy' on SSB?  I think the 
>signal report should be canned.  If it is a preamble for the data, 
>why don't we have one prior to the callsign? 
>
>Lok at FD, SS, Sprint, and I am sure there are others.  None of them 
>use 599 or 59,  right?  And those are some of the most fun contests 
>around. 

and most operators will make up a preamble for those contests (copy, please
copy.....) Those who don't likely send more fills. Think of the canned
signal report as just part of the format of the exchange, not the message.

---------------------------------
David Sarkozi, WB5N
Houston, TX
dsarkozi at infocom.net
see my Web Page "Birds of the Upper Texas Coast"
http://www.infocom.net/~dsarkozi/