[CQ-Contest] CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 222, Issue 22

[Drew Vonada-Smith]

With regards to the comments from AA and BB, I say "si si".

Really cool, but contesting?  No thanks.  Even DX, pretty boring.  Same experience re 6M modes drying up.  But if you like it, go for it...

73,
Drew K3PA

________________________________

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 22, 2021, at 12:59 PM, ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca wrote:
>
> ?de VE9AA > I am not quite as old as Jim/N3BB but have been around radio since
> the 60's and I find myself of basically the same attitude.
> I'm no Luddite, and accept most technologies as they come along, but derive
> absolutely zero satisfaction from FT8 QSO's (I think I made 1 or 2 back when it
> came out). That's it in a nutshell.  Where is the satisfaction?
>
> It is (was) simply amazing tech, but there's nothing in it for me.   All my
> 147DXCC's on 6m (for example)
> were done the old fashion way.  SSB or CW.  For me to work new ones via FT8
> would take all my (personal)
> pride away from the decades of hard work it took me to do that.
>
> On a related aspect, FT8 leaves a bad taste in my mouth, as it has removed 95%
> of the 6m DX on SSB and CW DX chasing possibilities for me, though
> we did get a nice opening the other day to EU and I worked 55 stns on CW (guess
> they had also grown weary of watching a computer
> do it for them) as most are now "parked" on 50.313MHz or wherever, refusing to
> budge even though the band is open.
>
> Contesting w/ FT8? Sorry. I don't see the lure.  Each to his own however and I
> remind myself the world would be a boring place if we were all the same.
>
> 73
>
> Mike VE9AA
>
>  Tor, I'm having a hard time even taking this thread seriously ... no critique
> on your excellent comments. But why in the world would anyone want to use the
> FT modes for a contest? The speed-slowing limitations of the transmssion
> notwithstanding, letting my computer detect some sub-noise signals through
> brilliant DSP technology and talk w/out me ever at the keyboard to another
> system doing the same? That's a contact? Just baffles my 79 year old ham radio
> brain.
>
> I totally "get it" that this is amazing technology and can have military and
> scientific uses, but for hobbiests to use it to "communicate" so-called amateur
> radio contacts in some form of competition just leaves me totally cold.
>
> But it is what it is, apparently, to many in our hobby.
>
> Jim N3BB
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest


------------------------------