If this thread were a 'mute' point we would not see it.
I don't know when and where the thread started, but I am sure that the
originator meant to write "moot" and not "mute" and somehow their spell
checker 'improved' the text and substituted "mute" for the intended 'moot'.
Such an error could only be made by a machine; real people would never allow
that error to creep in.
Tod, K0TO
On 2/22/13 7:54 PM, "Robert Chudek - K0RC" <k0rc@citlink.net> wrote:
> Probably (or as the young kids now say) 'Prolly' for the same reason
> locals would pick up the phone and call others to alert them about a new
> one that was on the air. Of course, this was prior to packet radio. Then
> there were the DX spotting voice repeaters, which gave way to the packet
> system that could receive and collect 'spots' even while you were still
> at work.
>
> Just a few days ago I was pining that I really missed the hand crank
> when I came out and found the battery was dead in my car!
>
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> On 2/22/2013 7:00 PM, Radio K0HB wrote:
>> The bigger question is why would anyone spot anyone except themselves?
>>
>> Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.
>>
>> 73, Hans, K0HB/4ID
>>
>> On Thursday, February 21, 2013, Robert Chudek - K0RC wrote:
>>
>> It was about 3-1/2 years ago I asked the question below, on this
>> reflector. The third full paragraph contains the core concept I
>> was asking / proposing. It didn't take too long for the technology
>> to 'change the game plan' once again! Yes, I'm gloating! Nyuk,
>> nyuk, nyuk... :-)
>>
>> Regarding those people objecting that the RBN isn't delivering a
>> pristine stream of data, my opinion is that the existing level of
>> accuracy is more than adequate. For example, K3LR pops up on my
>> bandmap and I work him. His call sign turns gray, letting me know
>> I have already worked him.
>>
>> Five minutes later, EK3LR pops up on the bandmap. Funny thing is
>> that EK3LR is sitting right on the same frequency as the K3LR I
>> already worked. My eyes and brain tells me instantaneously it's a
>> bust. I don't waste time removing it from the bandmap because I
>> know it's going to pop back up there again anyway. Cleaning the
>> bandmap is a waste of contesting time.
>>
>> Now if there was only a way to eliminate the clueless from
>> pointing and clicking their way to the elusive EK3 multiplier and
>> causing havoc on the K3LR run frequency. (Or substitute any of the
>> other traditionally busted spots; BY vs. 6Y, 5K vs. HK, etc. Oh
>> and MY personal favorite KØRF vs. KØRC.)
>>
>> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> / -----Original Message-----/
>> / From: Robert Chudek - K0RC [mailto:k0rc@citlink.net]/
>> / Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 02:18/
>> / To: cq-contest@contesting.com/
>> <http://cq-contest@contesting.com/>
>> / Subject: [CQ-Contest] Self spotting rationale/
>> / /
>> / This isn't a rhetorical question./
>> / /
>> / How / why was the "no self spotting" rule created in the
>> first place? Was/
>> / it a knee-jerk reaction to the introduction of new
>> technology at the time/
>> / spotting networks began to flourish? What actual purpose
>> does this rule/
>> / serve? Whatever that purpose, is it outdated by technology?/
>> / /
>> / The use of the spotting networks automatically classifies a
>> participant as/
>> / "assisted" in the first place. To the non-assisted
>> participants, why would/
>> / they care whether stations were self-spotting or not? When
>> I operate in/
>> / the non-assisted category I don't care what is going on
>> with the spotting/
>> / network./
>> / /
>> / To the participants in the "assisted" category, why not let
>> them spot/
>> / their brains out? Other than saturating the spotting
>> network I don't see a/
>> / down-side to this. If an assisted station spotted
>> themselves once every X/
>> / minutes, many things would "fall into place."/
>> / /
>> / First, there would be fewer busted calls being spotted.
>> Second, assisted/
>> / operators would know which bands were being used by the
>> self spotter (are/
>> / they operating 10 meters right now or not?). Third, self
>> spotting timers/
>> / could evolve in contest software to spot on a predetermined
>> schedule./
>> / Fourth, David's spotting reports would not be necessary to
>> see who was/
>> / breaking the rules. Fifth, I wouldn't have to worry whether
>> my call would/
>> / appear on a report as "helping my team mates in our contest
>> club" when I/
>> / spot the members. (I have basically quit spotting anyone
>> compared to the/
>> / early days of the spotting network.)/
>> / /
>> / I can only imagine if Wal-Mart, Target, and K-Mart were not
>> allowed to/
>> / advertise their stores were open for business and what
>> times you would/
>> / find them open. I think the "no self spotting" rule is absurd./
>> / /
>> / 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>>
>>
>> /
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 73, de Hans, K0HB
>> "Just a boy and his radio"
>> --
>> Sea stories at --------> http://K0HB.wordpress.com
>> Superstition trails ---> http://OldSlowHans.com
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|