[CQ-Contest] What sucks - was Re: CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 216, Issue 3

Wed Dec 2 20:32:17 EST 2020

What sucks are people who use or leave a non-specific subject title such as
Digest

Barry W2UP

On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 5:59 PM Hans Brakob <kzerohb at gmail.com> wrote:

> You forgot “people who like CQWW are disgusting”.
>
> 73, de Hans, KØHB
> “Just a Boy and his Radio”™
> ________________________________
> From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+kzerohb=gmail.com at contesting.com> on
> behalf of Ron Koenig <k4akkron at gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2020 2:05:41 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 216, Issue 3
>
> Does anyone on this list have anything Positive to say ? So far this week
> we have ...
> Contests Suck
> Contesting from W6 Sucks
> Please Copy Sucks (And I'll delete the valid Q)
> Operators Suck
> Rules Suck
> Zero Beat Sucks..
> Etc. Etc. Etc.
>
> If contesting and contesters disgust you so badly, perhaps another hobby is
> in order ? Seriously, I watched endless complaints about the WPX rules
> changes and how they were going to ruin everything..  80% were from people
> that had not posted a score in WPX for at least several years.
>
> Let's try something like The high bands have been Great, participation is
> at all time highs etc etc.. It's really no wonder it's hard to get people
> interested in contesting with the endless complaints.
>
> Get over yourselves and do something positive for the sport.
>
> Ron, WV4P
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2020, 11:00 AM <cq-contest-request at contesting.com> wrote:
>
> > Send CQ-Contest mailing list submissions to
> >         cq-contest at contesting.com
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >         http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >         cq-contest-request at contesting.com
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> >         cq-contest-owner at contesting.com
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of CQ-Contest digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >    1. CQWW is a Great Contest -- NOT! (Jim Brown)
> >    2. Re: Zero Beat packet pileups-a solution ! QZB (Mike DeChristopher)
> >    3. Old version of TR4W (steve.root)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 03:17:08 -0800
> > From: Jim Brown <k9yc at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> > To: cq-contest <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW is a Great Contest -- NOT!
> > Message-ID:
> >         <1062cd2c-1ee1-bd83-604d-6445fa9331a1 at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> >
> > I continue to be amazed (disgusted) by those who think this is a great
> > contest. It is simple-minded to the extreme -- for the vast majority of
> > the sations we work, our logging program fills in the exchange. The only
> > challenges are getting the call right and staying in sync with SO2R. And
> > thanks to archaic scoring rules (think the 1940s), if you're not close
> > to the Atlantic basin, you're not really in the contest. From W6, I use
> > DX contests like CQWW and ARRL DX only to see how well my antennas work.
> > This year, I spent 5 hours, mostly trying to work EU on 80 and 40.
> > Everything else was dullsville (how much fun is it working 500 JAs when
> > they provide one mult per band?).
> >
> > Indeed, CQWW's only virtue is that it is not US/NA centric, and the WPX
> > events are an order of magnitude better.
> >
> > 73, Jim K9YC
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:17:06 -0500
> > From: Mike DeChristopher <mfdechristopher at gmail.com>
> > To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Zero Beat packet pileups-a solution ! QZB
> > Message-ID:
> >         <
> > CAGKtc35Q9hSWDN0JGO4i0m9N9f5f9bhksRWB2mcnNVcjV0PyYQ at mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > Yes, this does seem to be getting worse. I agree that the RBN (and
> > automated spotting in general) is probably driving this behavior.
> > Clicky-clicky, worky-worky.
> >
> > Of course, almost every new rig having some variety of bandscope isn't
> > helping matters either; it is easy to imagine the urge to re-center on
> > the visible peak for an inexperienced op, even after N1MM+ "dithers"
> > the frequency.
> >
> > 73, Mike N1TA
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 5:37 PM Mike Smith VE9AA <ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > A relatively new phenomenon has emerged more prevalently in contesting
> > on CW
> > > in the last few years.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I think in part to the RBN (which I am not knocking, as I benefit from
> it
> > > just like the rest of my CW brethren),.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Namely, small 'packet pileups' ALL ZERO beat on your running frequency.
> > > click click click.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > So, the N1MMLoggerPlus Dev team recognized this a couple years ago and
> > now
> > > has an option to randomly offset spots when "clicking on spots".
> Awesome.
> > > Smart guys, that crew. Not everyone who runs N1MM uses this feature
> > however.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't know if other loggers do this, but maybe or maybe in the
> future?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > For those that don't know to keep tweaking their XIT around or to
> > randomize
> > > spots in N1MMLoggerPlus
> > >
> > > I propose a new Q signal used only in contesting, namely "QZB" which
> can
> > > mean anything from, "please don't zero beat me like the other 10 guys
> > > calling" or "turn on your XIT please" or anything to that effect.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I know there are guys out there that can do 5000-10000 Q's per weekend
> > and
> > > not be bothered with a zero beat pileup, but for us mere mortals not
> in a
> > > rare location with the benefit of always having MANY callers, (some
> > louder,
> > > some keen to the ways of the XIT control) then we need another way to
> > > instruct the (smallish) pileup that it sounds like one tone.  I tried
> ?,
> > I
> > > tried AGN, I even tried "XIT" once.and lo and behold it actually
> > > worked---once.  Maybe I got lucky with a guy that just wandered by or
> > > someone who knew what it was.  I dunno.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I tried everything I could think of, and nothing really worked.  Always
> > the
> > > same solid tone.  More callers always solved the problem, but a VE9 is
> > not
> > > exactly rare in CQWW, thus the issue.  I am sure every CDN,  USA and a
> > lot
> > > of EU stations were in the same boat, save the Zone 2 lads..they're
> > pretty
> > > rare.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I was so relieved when a superstation called in, overpowering the
> > pileup, or
> > > others joined in and we'd get those folks that would know to call 40Hz
> > high
> > > (or low) and then I could work them and move on.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > So, QZB..remember it, use it..(free of charge of course).now we have to
> > > alert CQ, ARRL, WAE, RDX, NAQP to this new Q-code.  Who will get the
> word
> > > out?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > No, it's not April 1rst !
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > CU (all of a sudden) in the next one ;-D
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike VE9AA "5"...or "NB"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike, Coreen & Corey
> > >
> > > Keswick Ridge, NB
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 09:18:22 -0500 (EST)
> > From: "steve.root" <steve.root at culligan4water.com>
> > To: "cq-contest at contesting.com" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] Old version of TR4W
> > Message-ID:
> >         <573112729.58376.1606918702554 at webmail.networksolutionsemail.com
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > As retirement looms I find renewed interest in contesting.  But I've hit
> a
> > quandary.  For many years I used TR, and later on TR4W.  Here's the
> problem.
> > the radios are K3's, and they interface through a Microham MK2R+.  The
> > latest versions of TR4W (4.94.1) don't reliably see the frequencies of
> the
> > radios.  It "blinks" on and off.  That sets off other problems and is a
> > show stopper.  I have an old version of TR4W (4.24.8) that sees both
> radio
> > perfectly....but doesn't see the LPT port so I can't switch rigs of
> > headphone back and forth for SO2R.  I know this isn't the best place to
> ask
> > this question but the support page for TR4W seems to have disappeared.
> >
> > I realize this is a long shot, but some anyone have a copy of the TR4W
> > install that falls somewhere in between 4.24.8 and 4.94.1 ?  Maybe I
> could
> > find a happy medium?
> >
> > Thanks guys and see you all on 10 meters in a couple weeks.
> >
> > 73 Steve K0SR
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 216, Issue 3
> > ******************************************
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>