Re: [digitalradio] What mean Too Wide?
24.05.2010 22:45, Rick Westerfield kirjutas: This would be a general definition that perhaps not everyone could fully agree on: Too Wide: takes up too much spectrum bandwidth for the amount of information delivered or the speed of the information's delivery. Rick, academically you are right. But the question/poll is about keyboard modes mental limit. For me the limit somewhere around rtty45 bw. Olivia 500 too wide, mfsk16 somewhere on the limit. The psk31 is de facto standard. I think good idea to measure/evaluate things with this standard. MFSK modes are undervalued but not in every case. For good or moderate propagation psk31 is the best (not academically). But for poor/disturbed propagation and in higher latitudes there are better modes. We can use many mfsk modes with different bw and tones. From standard user viewpoint - more is less. RSID, Video ID are good things. But we need de-facto mfsk-standard like psk31 to fire psk-folk in case of poor/disturbed propagation to switch mode. This is strategical/promotional BIG step. IMO Contestia 250/4 (or /8?) is enough good bw/speed compromise to take de facto mfsk-standard role. There are better modes/formats from speed viewpoint DominoEX11, MFSK16 or from snr viewpoint 250/16: So what mean too wide mode mentally? http://contestia.blogspot.com/ vy73 Jaak es1hj Poor or disturbed propagation constrains all of us into fewer bands for digital operations. With fewer sunspots, we all crowd the same bands which makes the too wide problem worse. Some modes are very narrow and are spectrum efficient but have little error correction. Others are too wide but have lots or error correction and are fast. As you very well know, these are the tradeoffs we all face. This definition might cause a bit of a Food Fight here on this reflector but hopefully . . . not. Rick -- KH2DF *From:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Jaak Hohensee *Sent:* Monday, May 24, 2010 1:21 PM *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* [digitalradio] What mean Too Wide? Hi Sometimes we hear, that mode or format is too wide. What this mean? Context - poor or disturbed propagation. Please answer. Your answer help to see how different people understand the term too wide. http://contestia.blogspot.com/ http://contestia.blogspot.com/ tnx! -- vy 73, Jaak es1hj -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
[digitalradio] What mean Too Wide?
Hi Sometimes we hear, that mode or format is too wide. What this mean? Context - poor or disturbed propagation. Please answer. Your answer help to see how different people understand the term too wide. http://contestia.blogspot.com/ tnx! -- vy 73, Jaak es1hj
[digitalradio] 6m season
Hi I know that some guys use normal (keyboard to keyboard) digitaldata modes in 6m. But there are no such strong bandplan like for cw/ssb. So difficult to find each other. Specification draft in http://contestia.blogspot.com/p/guidelines-6m-v10.html Any comments, suggestions? -- vy73 Jaak es1hj
Re: [digitalradio] Contestia 250 - new concept for usage
Skip, I agree with you. My considerations to prefer in HF Contestia 250/4 format is related to the idea to find some compromise for bpsk31 folk, Olivia light users, and rtty folk when the propagation is not enough good for bpsk31 and rtty. So Cnt 250/4 with 39wpm is the first alternative for bpsk and rtty folk and the last alternative for Olivia hardusers ;) The idea to use 250/4 format motivated also by fact that Cnt 250/4 signals are seen in wtrfl until the copy lost (-9dB). 250/8 is washed out from wtrfl around -10dB. Both, psk31 and rtty users was wont to see signals on wtrfl. To see signals is motivated also from QRM reducing viewpoint. The idea to make 2-step default switch from 250/4(-9dB) to 250/16 (-15dB) and so get additional snr -6dB is compensate 250/8 format snr-advantage. Default shift need default procedure what/how to do when the copy is lost. WPM considerations 29wpm (250/8) is good speed from cw-viewpoint, but too less from rtty/psk31 viewpoint. 39wpm (250/4) is somekind compromise between the different speed/snr expectations. vy73, Jaak es1hj 10.05.2010 2:59, KH6TY kirjutas: Hi Jaak, Great idea to start a long test of Contestia 250/4! Perhaps Contestia 250/8 can also be compared in actual practice to Contestia 250/4. Contestia 250/8 is slower (at 29 wpm), but decodes 2 dB deeper into the noise, which may be important when there is QSB (fading) and the signal is already near the noise level ( such as when the band is going out). Although I can type over 50 wpm, my personal feeling is that 29 wpm is fast enough for a QSO, but Contestia at 78 wpm (3 dB less sensitive) is more reasonable for passing traffic (if conditions can support 3 dB less sensitivity). If not, then to be able to pass the traffic at all, it has to be sent at a slower, more sensitive speed, such as Contestia 250/4. It all depends upon the average individual preference for typing speed for QSO's vs conditions.This may become clear during your tests. I hope the testers will make their minimum typing speed preferences known, as well as how well the mode works. 73, Skip KH6TY Jaak Hohensee wrote: Hi everybody * Contestia derived from Olivia. * Contestia 250/4 is channelfree like psk or rtty. BW less than rtty and same as psk125, 39wpm, snr -9dB. * So Contestia 250/4 is good narrowband alternative for psk31 or rtty folk, specially when propagtion is not for psk/rtty or signals are too weak. * Contestia 250/4 is good mode for mid- or high-latitude folk. Many times there are disturbed propagation path not suited for psk or rtty. * Concept testing period to the end of year 2010. Everybody is welcome. More info contestia.blogspot.com http://contestia.blogspot.com/ -- vy73, Jaak es1hj -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
Re: [digitalradio] Digital Band for 6M
By Reg 1 bandplan psk31 activity center is 50.285 73, Jaak es1hj 8.05.2010 23:16, bruce mallon kirjutas: I beleve about 50.300 I know there is some psk-31 around there --- On *Sat, 5/8/10, Russell Blair /russell_blai...@yahoo.com/* wrote: From: Russell Blair russell_blai...@yahoo.com Subject: [digitalradio] Digital Band for 6M To: Digital Radio digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, May 8, 2010, 4:03 PM Where does the Digital band start on 6M. ? I just put the beam back up and would like to get back on 6M digital.. Russell NC5O 1- Whoever said nothing is impossible never tried slamming a revolving door! 2- A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have. - Gerald Ford IN GOD WE TRUST Russell Blair (NC5O) Skype-Russell. Blair Hell Field #300 DRCC #55 30m Dig-group #693 -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
Re: [digitalradio] Unattended narrow mode transmission protection
Busy detection in case of QRP Olivia 500/32 signals about snr -17dB is myth. 73, Jaak es1hj/qrp 8.04.2010 19:41, Dave AA6YQ kirjutas: If there were no means for such stations to avoid transmitting atop detectable on-going QSOs, I might consider supporting such a proposal. Busy frequency detection, however, is demonstrably feasible and practical. Rewarding the long-term rude behavior of ops running unattended semi-automatic and automatic stations without busy detection by giving them dedicated sub-bands would send a very clear message: the way to obtain dedicated frequencies is to unrelentingly drive everyone else out of them. Appeasement never works. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- *From:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]*on Behalf Of *Andy obrien *Sent:* Thursday, April 08, 2010 7:50 AM *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* [digitalradio] Unattended narrow mode transmission protection Let me drill down on this some more to find out the prevailing view... Would those that object to Bonnie's idea, also object if the wide modes were not part of the issue?. How about these objections if there was a digital mode under 500 Hz that transmitted unattended under automatic control? It seems to me, that after years of complaints that PACTOR, ALE, and CW (W1AW) just fire up in the middle of a on-going QSO, that having an area designated for automatic unattended operations makes sense. Then, if we operate there, we do so knowing that W1AW or a WINMOR server may activate at any moment? (actually W1AW has a schedule , but you get my drift). A 500 Hz sliver of spectrum in 80, 60 (yes) 30, 17, and 10M would be all that is needed. The current ALE, Winmor, Pactor, operators (there really are only about 200 in the world , TOTAL ) would then use narrow forms of their mode to achieve their aims . coordinate schedules between them, and have 2500 Hz where their operations are primary, and other hams communications in these segments would be secondary. Andy K3UK On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:50 PM, n9dsj n9...@comcast.net mailto:n9...@comcast.net wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien k3uka...@... wrote: Andy K3UK Personalities aside, the proposed bandplan is a bad idea. I cannot think of a present or future mode that could be better served by this. ROS has its own problems and standard ALE and PactorIII presently have areas they can reside. Neither are new or advancing the state of art. Even Winmor, which is relatively recent, can not co-exist with existing Winlink PactorIII; is why they were told to stay out of the wide bandwidth automatic sub-bands. I have not found ALE to be a problem as they stay on pre-determined frequencies and actually have little traffic (no offense intended). The prospect of wide bandwidth Winlink bots being able to operate on the suggested frequencies is problematic and antithetical to the need for frequency conservation. Bill N9DSJ -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
[digitalradio] Limitation the pwr for automatic station?
Hello all Last sunday I had JASON fast-turbo QSO with UT5UBB, 33dBm. Just a half time ontop started some automatic station. Before the Jason signal was clear in wtrfl. I´m not totally against the automatic station. Some of these serve all our ham-community like beacons. But some servs only small interested groups. I think good idea to limit the tx-output pwr of automatic station to 30dBm excl beacons. What excellent digimode automatic station can do with 30dBm: http://wsprnet.org/drupal/wsprnet/spots?destination=wsprnet/spots -- 73, Jaak es1hj/qrp
[digitalradio] DominoEX 11 is more democratic
Hello From QRP-viewpoint mostly used contest and DXpedition mode RTTY not democratic. DominoEX 11 seems more suited for QRP and QRO common contesting and for DXepeditions. If the RTTY is reference, the DominoEX 11 speed is in big same, but snr is -7dB better. RTTY45 BW is 270 Hz, DominoEX 11 262 Hz Difficult to change the culture of use RTTY. But to bring the DEX11 as second mode for contests and DXpeditions is small step for more democratric use of our common resource - ham radiofrequencies. -- 73 de es1hj/qrp Jaak
Re: [digitalradio] Re: DominoEX 11 is more democratic
DaveNF2G wrote: Since when is contesting supposed to be democratic? It's a competition, not a debate. The democratic in context of contest is synonym. The question: Can the QRP-power ham take part from rtty contest and how? If NO, then the contest from QRP viewpoint discrimination. Wikipedia: Discriminatory behaviors take many forms, but they all involve some form of exclusion or rejection.^[ #cite_note-0 73 de Jaak es1hj/qrp 73 de Dave, NF2G
Re: [digitalradio] DominoEX 11 is more democratic
Phil Williams wrote: Jaak, I agree. There are definite advantages of using DominoEX11 over of RTTY. I am not quite sure how you get past the culture of RTTY, but I like your suggestion of using DominoEX11 as the secondary mode. _Maybe, one could work a station twice - once in RTTY and then again, in DominoEX11_ _and earn additional points. What do you think?_ philw de ka1gmn Yes Phil, I´m not against the rtty. I have some nice rtty qso with rare dx-stations. I thank the fortune... To include the DominoEX in rtty contests it needs some prework from main contest program providers. And the change of rules in manner so the qrp and low power category are in table. 73 de Jaak es1hj/qrp (es1w, es8w, es0w) On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:39 AM, Jaak Hohensee jaak.hohen...@eesti.ee mailto:jaak.hohen...@eesti.ee wrote: Hello From QRP-viewpoint mostly used contest and DXpedition mode RTTY not democratic. DominoEX 11 seems more suited for QRP and QRO common contesting and for DXepeditions. If the RTTY is reference, the DominoEX 11 speed is in big same, but snr is -7dB better. RTTY45 BW is 270 Hz, DominoEX 11 262 Hz Difficult to change the culture of use RTTY. But to bring the DEX11 as second mode for contests and DXpeditions is small step for more democratric use of our common resource - ham radiofrequencies. -- 73 de es1hj/qrp Jaak -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
Re: [digitalradio] Re: DominoEX 11 is more democratic
Rick Westerfield wrote: Now I understand why Domino never caught on much with me . . . _I'm a Republican :)_ Rick - KH2DF Rick, is this something genetic? :) 73 de Jaak es1hj/qrp Sent from my iPhone On Nov 26, 2009, at 7:47 AM, DaveNF2G d...@nf2g.com mailto:d...@nf2g.com wrote: Since when is contesting supposed to be democratic? It's a competition, not a debate. 73 de Dave, NF2G -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Has anyone tried the ASuS EEE pc 901?
Vojtech Bubnik wrote: PocketDigi will run most digital modes (RTTY, PSK31, MFSK, Olivia ...) on any Windows desktop or laptop with 150MHz CPU. Where to DL, how to install? I tried without success on XP Jaak es1hj/qr It is efficient enough to decode PSK31 on 75 MHz Pentium and show waterfall. 73, Vojtech OK1IAK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Brent Gourley bg...@... wrote: I have run digipan on a 75 mHz P2 W95 notebook. Long ago. KE4MZ, Brent Dothan, AL bg...@... www.wb4zpi.org - Original Message - From: Ralph Mowery ku...@... To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2009 9:42 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Has anyone tried the ASuS EEE pc 901? --- On Mon, 6/22/09, jeffnjr484 jeffnjr...@... wrote: From: jeffnjr484 jeffnjr...@... Subject: [digitalradio] Has anyone tried the ASuS EEE pc 901? To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, June 22, 2009, 11:24 AM Hello, Has anyone used the ASUS laptop for psk31 or any digital modes im looking at it for some portable ops http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001BYD178/ref=noref?ie=UTF8s=pc http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001BYD178/ref=noref?ie=UTF8s=pc It looks like a neat computer and the price is outstanding just wanted to know if anyone has tried it jeff kd4qit The 901 should be just fine for the digital modes. I have the ASUS 1000HE which is just about the same computer except for the hard drive vers the solid state memory and a few extras. I have used Digipan and several other programs for psk31 with no problem. Runs mmtty fine. If you do not have a usb to serial port adaptor you may not be able to control the rig. Some of the interface units come with the adaptors for this. It does not really take much of a computer to run basic psk31. I have ran psk 31 with some 200 mhz desktop computers years ago. Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
[digitalradio] Spotter or list?
Hello to all Good spotter for digi http://www.hamspots.net/home.php? -- Jaak es1hj/qrp
Re: [digitalradio] Contestia RTTYM
Hi Simon and all I made some pathsimulations with RTTYM and Contestia from viewpoint QRP and contesting. My results show that both are dead modes. But RTTYM with UOS like Sholto believe it would be much better. The data about 1.5dB snr or 3dB in relation with original Olivia is myth. Better alternative is FEC-free DominoEX 5/11 for contesting and MFSK16 for everyday use. The original Olivia is bulletproof but a little slow and wide. The test results in pdf-file http://www.edutee.net/QuickPlace/digiqrp/Main.nsf/h_50B8373EB47C85CEC22573B20035031F/44CE2826803EF034C225759B0080DEC7/?OpenDocument or if the link dont open: www.edutee.net/digiqrp Jaak es1hj/qrp Simon (HB9DRV) wrote: Is there anyone out there who uses both DM780 MixW who could record wave files using DM780 where the wave files contain Contestia and RTTYM trasmissions? You'll need to couple the programs using something like VAC. Ideally one file per mode with a reasonable long text. I need the waves files to be sure I implement Contestia and RTTYM correctly. I don't have mixW and don't use it less i get accussed of plagiarism and lawyers start hunting me (yes, it has happened before). Simon HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com wlmailhtml:%7B32707AD4-6E7A-4DD5-B438-269E50A418FB%7Dmid://0258/%21x-usc:http://www.ham-radio-deluxe.com/ www.sdr-radio.com wlmailhtml:%7B32707AD4-6E7A-4DD5-B438-269E50A418FB%7Dmid://0258/%21x-usc:http://www.sdr-radio.com/ -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
[digitalradio] QRP-viewpoint (5 digital modes you need, the only 5.)
The DigiQRP viewpoint other. 1. The RTTY is discrimination mode, not for QRP. We need something other for contests. 2. MFSK16 is good compromise with pic-capability. more info http://www.edutee.net/digiqrp Test results: PathSim Tab, below pdf-file Jaak es1hj/qrp Andrew O'Brien wrote: With the varying discussions about the performance of specific modes , and the comments about lack of activity for some modes, I present the following list of 5 modes the digital mode ham should have...and probably all you really need. 1. PSK31 (and other variants up to PSK250) , plenty of activities both brief and rag chew , activity 24 hours per day. Use PSKmail to send email if you wish. Consider QPSK for tougher conditions . ARQ PSK available in FL-digi for emcomm work (available for free via Winwarbler. FL-Digi , DM780, Multipsk, Pocket PSK and MMVARI. 2. RTTY still DX to be had via this mode and contesting if you like contests ((available for free via Winwarbler, FL-Digi , DM780, Multipsk, MMTTY, and MMVARI. 3. JT65A. If low power DXing is you thing, this is your mode. Brief exchanges of signal reports and location, no conversation mode (available for free via WSJT, Multipsk, and soon to be released JT65-HF) 4. Olivia , weak signal capable plus keyboard conversations.Wide and narrow versions to vary with conditions ((available for free via FL-Digi , DM780, Multipsk, ) 5. Feld Hell. Good speed, surprising robust, a fair amount of activity, easier on your duty cycle that other modes, not good after a couple of beers. ((available for free via FL-Digi , DM780, Multipsk ) That's it, all you need. Yes, I left out MFSK16 despite it being a good mode. It is too fusy at times and most things you can do with MFSK16 ,you can do with an Olivia variant. MT63 is effective but just too much of a bandwidth hog, hardly any activity. If you don't want the super robust brief exchanges of JT65A, you could substitute DominoEX but you could go a week without hearing anyone else. MFTT at quarter speed seems useful, has promise. I won't count ALE as a specific mode but will still argue that all hams should be ALE capable. Still a great concept. Pactor..well great at P3 but costs too many Euros. The rest can be great fun, but if you want just five, the above are what you need. Andy K3UK -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
Re: [digitalradio] It's Getting Close to SKIRMISH!
DominoEX 5 or 11 baud excellent contest mode. Does the DominoEX accepted? In results page http://www.n2ty.org/seasons/tara_dpx_results.html looks like accepted. DominoEX 5 and 11 bandwidth is 250Hz, speed 44/80 wpm. DominoEX with good immunity to freq.offsets. Poor propagation snr about -6dB And DominoEX produce only double errors that specially good for contests - less errors in log. DomEX 5/11 supported by Fldigi and Multipsk. 73, Jaak eshj/qrp n...@n2ty.org wrote: TARA invites all you digital hams out there in radio land to SKIRMISH on Saturday, April 18, 2009 from Z to 2400Z. The TARA SKIRMISH is a multi digital mode operation, each mode being a separate entry. This contest is a must for you prefix hunters. There will be many new or rare prefixes heard. So get busy and dust off those rig interfaces. Adjust your sound cards. Sort out the cables. Fire up the software. Review the Macros and check out the rules at www.n2ty.org/seasons/tara_dpx_rules.html http://www.n2ty.org/seasons/tara_dpx_rules.html '73 and hope to work you in the Skirmish - Br. Rich, Contest Manager kc2...@arrl.net *The Average US Credit Score is 692. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221621489x1201450100/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID%3D62%26bcd%3DAprilAvgfooterNO62* -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
Re: [digitalradio] THOR is static-proof (Re: KV9U - MT63)
Tony wrote: The most impressive thing about MT63 is how it seems to resist heavy static crashes. I made a few recordings with short segments of the signal removed to simulate this type of QRN and there was little effect on copy. What about THOR? Thor stated to be more static-proof. Jaak es1hj/qrp -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
Re: [digitalradio] FLDIGI
Try first CAT rate 4800bps. I remember, that 817 or 857D work better with lower rate (RigCAT) and for me this is default for both rig. My Fldigi settings: Retry interval 30ms, Commands interval 70ms FT857D with DigiKeyer and FT-817 with SignaLink-1+ Jaak es1hj/qrp Matti Niemelä wrote: Fred, I have the same problem with my FT-857D. No CAT control with RigCAT or Hamlib selection. Matti/OH2ZT - Original Message - *From:* Fred VE3FAL mailto:flesn...@tbaytel.net *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Saturday, February 14, 2009 10:31 PM *Subject:* [digitalradio] FLDIGI Gang: I am having trouble getting FLDIGI and my FT-857 to communicate with each other. Any other CAT controlled software seems to work ok for it Anyone else try this program with the same radio yet. Fred VE3FAL avast! Antivirus http://www.avast.com: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090214-0, 02/14/2009 Tested on: 2/14/2009 3:31:08 PM avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1952 - Release Date: 02/13/09 18:29:00 -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee
[digitalradio] microHAM not compatible with Linux?
Hello I started using Acer AspireOne Linux version. Fldigi run nicely. Bad news that microHAM DigiKeyer is not supported . microHAM support answer for my query: /There is no compatible software for DigiKeyer under Linux, or better say, I'm not aware of any, despite there was several guys asking for documentation. I'm sorry. 73 Jozef OM7ZZ / Hope this helps someone. -- 73 de Jaak es1hj/qrp
Re: [digitalradio] Humans tolerate robots!
Dave! You wrote, that there is nothing wrong with transmitting robots in ham-bands - only verification of frequency. IMO there are minimum 2 more general questions. 1. Ethics. Robot ethics. So the primary question is not verificational. Does the transmitting robot must respect/tolerate operators or vice versa? Isaac Asimov formulated some basic principles years ago. Now South-Korea want to release The Robot Ethics Charter. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6425927.stm 2. If the ham community accept robots in ham bands, then in nearest future we see programs with artificial intelligence, that make 24h QSOs from starting to QSLing. What you expect from QSO? Robot or operator? Better to discuss this topic before. HNY 2008, Jaak ES1HJ/QRP Dave AA6YQ wrote: The flaw in your rhetoric, Jaak, is that Winlink PMBOs are QRMing existing QSOs whether or not an emergency is in progress. No one has a problem with this during an emergency -- but most of the time (thank goodness!) there is no emergency, and we're being QRM'd for no rational reason. _There is nothing wrong with unattended stations, message passing, or using Pactor III -- but there is a plenty wrong with failing to verify that the frequency is locally clear before transmitting during non-emergency conditions._ 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- *From:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of *Jaak Hohensee *Sent:* Sunday, December 30, 2007 5:40 AM *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] Humans tolerate robots! Dear Rodney You are wrong. You know laws/regulations, but ham-robots dont. Ham-robots have strong mantra - emergency. And strong mission - helping people. What you and other ham-humans have against this rhetoric? Ham-humans need better rhetoric against ham-robots. Like this: Mantra for ham-humans: Ham bands robotfree! Robots act in ham-bands like communication terrorists. Ham-humans mission: To developing human communication skills for any case, not only for emergency. For emergency better widely used QRP-readiness. 73, Jaak ES1HJ/QRP Rodney wrote: Tolerant of what? Intentional interference? Don't think so! Tolerant of blatant breaking of laws and regulations? NOT! */Jaak Hohensee [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote: Demetre SV1UY wrote: ...This is supposed to be a free world but in a free world _we should always be a bit more tolerant_, don't you think? 73 de Demetre SV1UY mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] New era beginning... HNY 2008 from DigiQRP community. -- Jaak Hohensee ES1HJ/QRP . -- Jaak Hohensee ES1HJ/QRP -- Kirjutas ja tervitab Jaak Hohensee gsm +37256 560172
Re: [digitalradio] Humans tolerate robots!
Dear Rodney
You are wrong. You know laws/regulations, but ham-robots dont.
Ham-robots have strong mantra - emergency. And strong mission - helping
people.
What you and other ham-humans have against this rhetoric?
Ham-humans need better rhetoric against ham-robots. Like this:
Mantra for ham-humans: Ham bands robotfree! Robots act in ham-bands like
communication terrorists.
Ham-humans mission: To developing human communication skills for any
case, not only for emergency. For emergency better widely used
QRP-readiness.
73, Jaak
ES1HJ/QRP
Rodney wrote:
Tolerant of what? Intentional interference? Don't think so!
Tolerant of blatant breaking of laws and regulations? NOT!
*/Jaak Hohensee [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote:
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
...This is supposed to be a free world but in a free world _we
should always be a bit more tolerant_, don't you think?
73 de Demetre SV1UY
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
New era beginning...
HNY 2008 from DigiQRP community.
--
Jaak Hohensee
ES1HJ/QRP
. !-- #ygrp-mkp{ border: 1px solid #d8d8d8; font-family:
Arial; margin: 14px 0px; padding: 0px 14px; } #ygrp-mkp hr{ border:
1px solid #d8d8d8; } #ygrp-mkp #hd{ color: #628c2a; font-size: 85%;
font-weight: bold; line-height: 122%; margin: 10px 0px; } #ygrp-mkp
#ads{ margin-bottom: 10px; } #ygrp-mkp .ad{ padding: 0 0; } #ygrp-mkp
.ad a{ color: #ff; text-decoration: none; } -- !-- #ygrp-sponsor
#ygrp-lc{ font-family: Arial; } #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd{ margin:
10px 0px; font-weight: bold; font-size: 78%; line-height: 122%; }
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad{ margin-bottom: 10px; padding: 0 0; } --
!-- #ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px; font-family:
arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;*font-size:small;*font:x-small;}
#ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;} #ygrp-mlmsg select,
input, textarea {font:99% arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;*font-size:100%;}
#ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;} #ygrp-text{ font-family: Georgia;
} #ygrp-text p{ margin: 0 0 1em 0; } #ygrp-tpmsgs{ font-family: Arial;
clear: both; } #ygrp-vitnav{ padding-top: 10px; font-family: Verdana;
font-size: 77%; margin: 0; } #ygrp-vitnav a{ padding: 0 1px; }
#ygrp-actbar{ clear: both; margin: 25px 0; white-space:nowrap; color:
#666; text-align: right; } #ygrp-actbar .left{ float: left;
white-space:nowrap; } .bld{font-weight:bold;} #ygrp-grft{ font-family:
Verdana; font-size: 77%; padding: 15px 0; } #ygrp-ft{ font-family:
verdana; font-size: 77%; border-top: 1px solid #666; padding: 5px 0; }
#ygrp-mlmsg #logo{ padding-bottom: 10px; } #ygrp-vital{
background-color: #e0ecee; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 2px 0 8px
8px; } #ygrp-vital #vithd{ font-size: 77%; font-family: Verdana;
font-weight: bold; color: #333; text-transform: uppercase; }
#ygrp-vital ul{ padding: 0; margin: 2px 0; } #ygrp-vital ul li{
list-style-type: none; clear: both; border: 1px solid #e0ecee; }
#ygrp-vital ul li .ct{ font-weight: bold; color: #ff7900; float:
right; width: 2em; text-align:right; padding-right: .5em; }
#ygrp-vital ul li .cat{ font-weight: bold; } #ygrp-vital a{
text-decoration: none; } #ygrp-vital a:hover{ text-decoration:
underline; } #ygrp-sponsor #hd{ color: #999; font-size: 77%; }
#ygrp-sponsor #ov{ padding: 6px 13px; background-color: #e0ecee;
margin-bottom: 20px; } #ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{ padding: 0 0 0 8px;
margin: 0; } #ygrp-sponsor #ov li{ list-style-type: square; padding:
6px 0; font-size: 77%; } #ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{ text-decoration:
none; font-size: 130%; } #ygrp-sponsor #nc{ background-color: #eee;
margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0 8px; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad{ padding: 8px
0; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{ font-family: Arial; font-weight: bold;
color: #628c2a; font-size: 100%; line-height: 122%; } #ygrp-sponsor
.ad a{ text-decoration: none; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
text-decoration: underline; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad p{ margin: 0; }
o{font-size: 0; } .MsoNormal{ margin: 0 0 0 0; } #ygrp-text tt{
font-size: 120%; } blockquote{margin: 0 0 0 4px;} .replbq{margin:4} --
--
Jaak Hohensee
ES1HJ/QRP
[digitalradio] Humans tolerate robots!
Demetre SV1UY wrote: ...This is supposed to be a free world but in a free world _we should always be a bit more tolerant_, don't you think? 73 de Demetre SV1UY mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] New era beginning... HNY 2008 from DigiQRP community. -- Jaak Hohensee ES1HJ/QRP
