[Moon-net] Fw: [Moon] QSO or not?
J.M.Prat
ea3dxu at sapse.com
Wed May 2 13:43:10 CDT 2007
Hi All
I am very angry to see this public lynchihg of Bernd and Frank Expedition ,
this is the worse way we all can go.
1 - Who will do an expedition if receibed this lynching from " some EME
comunity members " ?
2 - Jimmy do you seriously think this " QSO police " is the best way to
attract the new and small EME hams to CW EME QSO ?
3 - even all this I gave my full suport to Bernd and Frank expedition
4 - I encourage to all EME hams to do EME expeditions in any band and
modality JT65B / CW , I accept posible mistake , but apreciate
a big number of EXCELLENT EME QSOs , for my this is the most
important part on a DX expedition
5 - as all can see I do not work ZB2 expedition on EME , the only reason was
I never can see my call in any decoded , hope next time I
will get more lucky .
73 de Josep EA3DXU
----- Original Message -----
From: "DF2ZC" <DF2ZC at gmx.de>
To: <john.peters at iae.nl>; <jimmyv at hol.gr>
Cc: <moon at moonbounce.info>
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 6:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Moon] QSO or not?
> Oh yes John...how could I be that unprecise. Actually it wasn`t so much a
> type error but a click & paste error. Are you satisfied now? I hope so.
>
> This will be my final post on this thing...I should perhaps consider
> giving up on going to dxps if I need to spend so much time afterwards
> countering malicous allegations here on this reflector and on a particular
> blog. Which maybe stole my time to doublecheck before uploading the log.
>
> 73 Bernd DF2ZC
>
> ----- Ursprungliche Nachricht -----
> >Von: "John Peters"<john.peters at iae.nl>
> >Gesendet: 02.05.07 18:09:11
> >An: "jimmyv at hol.gr"<jimmyv at hol.gr>, "df2zc at gmx.de"<df2zc at gmx.de>
> >Cc: "moon at moonbounce.info"<moon at moonbounce.info>
> >Betreff: Re: [Moon] QSO or not?
> >Hi All, Jimmy, Bernd and Joe in speciffic,
> >
> >I've read the mailings with intrest, but excuse me to say.. Bernd if
> you
> >made a typing error.. you must have made 2 errors..... All your NC
> contacts
> >contain NO Received report only the one with PE1BTX you received a RO
> report
> >while PE1BTX says he had no good decode and never has send RO
> >
> >So it seems to that Jimmy had good reasons to assume there was
> something
> >strange going on.....
> >
> >73! de John PA5MS
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <jimmyv at hol.gr>
> >To: <df2zc at gmx.de>
> >Cc: <moon at moonbounce.info>
> >Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 2:17 PM
> >Subject: RE: [Moon] QSO or not?
> >
> >
> >Dear Bernd
> >
> >thank you for your reply.
> >I am glad it was a typing error, as this can happen to anyone.
> >Now even a mistake in a cw qso, one side thinking it was complete and
> other
> >side
> >believing it is not, can also very rarely happen under marginal
> conditions,
> >even
> >to experienced operators.
> >
> >Have a good travel & 73,
> >Jimmy SV1BTR
> >
> >> Dear Jimmy,
> >>
> >> It is an honour to me that you think I make no mistakes. However
> unlike
> >> you
> >> and some others I am not perfect. The answer to the noise you΄re
> making
> >> below
> >> is rather simple. I made a typing error. This can happen, independant
> from
> >> the mode of the QSO or NO-QSO.
> >>
> >> I am currently on business travel and will have access to the paper
> log
> >> only
> >> this weekend when I am back home. I will then correct the log on my
> >> website.
> >>
> >> I have never ever had problems with decoding single tones messages
> but
> >> every
> >> little mistake seems to serve as a wonderful platformfoor those
> interested
> >> to
> >> intrigue against WSJT and DS in particular. BTW I also made a typing
> error
> >> with Jan DL9KR΄s 70 cm CW qso which I printed as 10z instead of 11z.
> >>
> >> I hope this clarification comes early enough for Peter SM2CEW΄s "The
> world
> >> ist a disk" blog, before he starts using my typing error again as an
> >> argument against JT65 DS in toto.
> >>
> >> Of course if it had been a cw QSO and I had made this typing error,
> nobody
> >> would have written an email o the reflector.
> >>
> >> 73 Bernd DF2ZC
> >>
> >> ----- Ursprόngliche Nachricht -----
> >> >Von: "jimmyv at hol.gr"<jimmyv at hol.gr>
> >> >Gesendet: 02.05.07 10:19:54
> >> >An: "moon at moonbounce.info"<moon at moonbounce.info>,
> >> "moon-net at list-serv.davidv.net"<moon-net at list-serv.davidv.net>
> >> >Betreff: [Moon-net] QSO or not?
> >> >
> >> >Hello all
> >> >
> >> >I am trying to understand how JT65 works sometimes (even without
> Deep
> >> Search!),
> >> >especially when it comes to expeditions. I am confused.
> >> >Could you please explain to me how is possible to have a QSO as
> >> complete
> >> in the
> >> >log of an expedition, when the station calling them says it is
> not
> >> complete?
> >> >However, expedition says it has data files for all QSOs. So does
> the
> >> station
> >> >trying to work them. So where is the error?
> >> >This is even more profound because in the case of JT65 it is even
> more
> >> difficult
> >> >to make a personal judgement mistake. Since software algorithms
> do the
> >> decision
> >> >making for you and we have been told that reliability of a
> contact
> >> remains
> >> >intact. Regardless of signal level.
> >> >
> >> >As i do not question the integrity and experience of operators in
> the
> >> specific
> >> >expedition (in fact they are experienced operators with good
> operating
> >> >standards), neither do i question the experience and integrity of
> the
> >> >particular station calling them, then is it the JT65 software
> >> generating
> >> the
> >> >error? I think, and hope, not.
> >> >
> >> >Perhaps is it the plain shorthand messages? To me, it looks like
> this
> >> being the
> >> >reason, because shorthand messages are not accompanied with
> callsigns
> >> (unless
> >> >the Big exception of someone transferring both reports and
> callsigns
> >> as
> >> unknown
> >> >text). Therefore, using the standard format of shorthand
> messages, in
> >> a
> >> pileup
> >> >situation, one can not be sure if the RO or Rs received was for
> him or
> >> >not...(as logger extract shows below at 5:19)
> >> >We have seen situations with other expeditions in the past.
> >> >
> >> >To substantiate my argument and subsequent confusion with facts,
> pls
> >> find
> >> below
> >> >extracts of ON4KST logger showing PE1BTX saying to ZB2/DH7FB he
> did
> >> not
> >> have
> >> >complete QSO with ZB2 expedition. At the end of this mail, pls
> see the
> >> log of
> >> >ZB2 expedition where QSO is listed as complete.
> >> >
> >> >Once more, i will repeat this is nothing personal and NOT aiming
> the
> >> operators
> > >
>
> [Nachricht abgeschnitten. Tippen Sie auf "Bearb."->"Zum Downloaden
> markieren", um den Rest der Nachricht abzurufen.]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moon mailing list
> Moon at moonbounce.info
> http://www.moonbounce.info/mailman/listinfo/moon
>
> Please enter/update your standings: http://www.vhf-dx.net/top.html
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.2/784 - Release Date: 01/05/2007
> 14:57
>
>
More information about the Moon-net
mailing list