CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] 6M CW

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 6M CW
From: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 11:14:18 -0700
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I'm not a fan of FT8 for various reasons (mostly its constricted 
interface), but you realize that FT8 has encouraged more activity on the 
bands than just about anything else, right?  Many CWers moved to FT8 for 
its S/N advantages, but others moved to FT8 simply because it has far 
more activity (HF or VHF) than CW does.  And LOTS of the folks on FT8 
would not be on CW if FT8 went away.
Calling FT8 an "existential threat to ham radio" is ludicrous no matter 
how much you or I may dislike it.  Anything that encourages lots of 
activity like FT8 does is exactly the opposite.
Dave   AB7E



On 10/25/2022 6:10 AM, James Cain wrote:
When FT-8 crawled out from under a rock a few years ago, I submitted a post
to cq-contest. The  reflector "monitor" rejected it. I called FT-8 an
"existential threat to amateur radio." Now, as the N6RO band/mode totals
bear witness, FTx is more than an existential threat, it is *reality*.

cain K1TN
_______________________________________________
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
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>