"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in
nk.net:


"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
ink.net...

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in
ink.net:


"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in
nk.net:


"N2EY" wrote in message
m...


Perhaps someone can explain a certain operating habit I hear
on Field Day - but only one 'phone:

I hear most FD 'phone ops repeating the *received* exchange.
That is, you'll hear:

"November Two Echo Yankee from November Three Kilo Zed, roger
your One Bravo Eastern Pennsylvania, OK on your 1B EPA, please
copy my three alfa ...."

Why do so many deem it necessary to tell me what I just told
them? Heck, I know what class and section I'm in!

On CW, the single letter "R" does the job, and some ops don't
even bother with the R - they send their exchange as an
indication that they got yours. Or they send "TU" - (thank
you) which does the job of "roger" and "73" both.

--

One other point: Neither FD nor SS have the signal report as
part of the contact. FD is callsign, section and class, SS is
serial number, class, callsign, check and section, plus date
and time which you don't have to send but which are part of
the required logging.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Well Jim, I think it means that phone ops are lids and real
hams do it with continous wave.

Dan/W4NTI




At last your real agenda comes out, Dan. Somehow. I'm not
surprised. You want the code test kept because you consider all
of us phone ops to be lids.

Alun, N3KIP

No, not all phone ops are lids. Just the ones that think phone
is better than CW. Does that shoe fit Alun?

Dan/W4NTI



You are unbeleivable.

1) That ain't what you said; and

2) Even if it were it would be an indefensible position.

If we define a lid as being a bad operator, you are saying that
anyone who thinks that one mode is better than another is a bad
operator (unless they say that your preferred mode is better). I
have never heard such idiotic cr*p in my entire life.

My only reason for preferring phone is that I like to use radio to
talk. If you prefer to make bleeping noises instead I could't care
less. If you were into SSTV, or PSK31 or what-have-you I would say
that was fine too. On the whole, I would say that comparisons of
bandwidth, throughput, signal-to- noise etc were only valid within
one type of information, whether it is phone, or data or video, or
whatever.

You said, and I quote "phone ops are lids" and then, partially
recanting "not all phone ops are lids. Just the ones that think
phone is better than CW". Well, I am a phone op and I think that
phone is not surprisingly better at carrying voice information than
CW is.

You know what, though, you are the lid.

Alun, N3KIP

And I think your a lid. Now what?

Dan/W4NTI



Oh, and one more thing Alun. Why is it you don't think CW (Morse
Code) is talking ?

I'm not talking to you now either, just typing on a keyboard

Do you think we just sit in front of the radio and
send random characters? Or even random words?


I've never listened to you in QSO - you might for all I know

Comunications is the 'exchange of information'. Are you actually that
ignorant Alun?

Dan/W4NTI




Talking is communications, but not necessarily vicea versa