"*Or maybe turn on your "Macro User Detector" (MUD), which immediately terminates any QSO when a macro is detected. * *Have a bitchin' 2010"
Funny. philw de ka1gmn * On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 11:43 AM, F.R. Ashley <gda...@clearwire.net> wrote: > > > > ** > *Good points by G3OBU. * > > *I find Macros to be quite useful. I use them to send info that is part > of a normal QSO. I use them for program operation, such as ALIGN:1500.. I > imbed Macros to log the QSO when it ends. I have macros loaded with QSO > info in several different languages. Why should I have to manually type > things like that every time I have a QSO? That makes far less sense than > using a macro.* > *What does it matter to you if I send this info via a Macro or by typing > it? You can't tell. I make full use of macros and will continue to use > them, and you'll never know it. If you don't like them, don't use them. Or > maybe turn on your "Macro User Detector" (MUD), which immediately terminates > any QSO when a macro is detected. * > *Have a bitchin' 2010* > ** > *Buddy WB4M* > ** > ** > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* John Netro-N9WVM <n9...@yahoo.com> > *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > *Sent:* Sunday, December 27, 2009 8:48 AM > *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] Re: Dxing and long winded digital ops > > I am not a typist when it comes to ragchewing on digi modes can't find > the letters fast enough, I don't keep my fingers on the keyboard they qay I > learned in high school typing class > if I have to type some thing to a contact I type it in while he is sending > then put the macro to finish off the qso > N9WVM > --- On *Sun, 12/27/09, Music Maker <jhaddle...@msn.com>* wrote: > > > From: Music Maker <jhaddle...@msn.com> > Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Dxing and long winded digital ops > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Date: Sunday, December 27, 2009, 7:45 AM > > > Hi Folks, > > I fully understand everyones point of view over Macros, and hate them > myself. I must admit (as a very recent newcomer to Digimode), I do use the > Macro for calling CQ, but more often return to others calling. > > I would love to 'ragchew', but here in Europe, there are some underlying > reasons why this is a rare occurance, and total Macro QSO's are the norm. > > Most operators in Europe can't speak enough good English to conduct a > conversation, (I can't speak Russian at all!), so Macros provide a way of > doing it. Secondly - and this applies world-wide - some operators are not > very good typists, and are embarrased by their slow speed. Add to this > dyslectic, disabled, and even illiterate, and Macros offer these people a > life line. > > I am the fortunate one, as I am a competent 'touch typist' and am quite > happy at anything up to about 50wpm, so obviously am very comfortable in a > 'rag chew' - How many other Amateur Operators are really comfortable and > competent typists? (as a percentage of the whole). > > Just my Point of view. > > John G3OBU > > ............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... > .... > > --- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. > com<http://us.mc638.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com>, > "obrienaj" <k3uka...@.. .> wrote: > > > > I'm all for a good digital mode rag-chew...but allow me to be the Grinch > on Boxing Day and gripe about digital ops that take FOREVER to sign-off when > working DXpeditions and the like. Today when trying to work a needed entity > , and with a fading band, I had to patiently wait my turn while others that > had got through were sending such none sense as how many QSO's they had had > in the particular digital mode and the exact time and date they had logged > the QSO. Do we really need to know when you LOGGED the station you were JUST > working? > > > > I did work the DX, but I can complain too, right ? > > > > Andy K3UK > > > > > >
