I'm new to the group, so I hope it's okay to share my opinion as I've used
JT9/65 for some time now and just started using FT8 last night.
Personally, I don't care for the Call 1st or Call Weak options. Seems too
automated for me. It's only a 15 second cycle, so no big deal if you don't
get them answered on the first try. What I've been doing is:
1. Call CQ
2. Watch the Waterfall.
3. If I see someone replying to my CQ, Disable TX so I don't accidentally
CQ again.
4. As soon as possible, double-click the caller when decoded.
The JT modes all include redundancy in the transmission. You probably have
at least 5 seconds after the start of the cycle, maybe more to start
transmitting and enough information will still make it through for a
successful decode.
That said, if others really want the auto-reply features, I won't be
heartbroken to see them included. To each their own, as long as I could
still disable them. Freedom of choice and all.
As for the auto-sequencing, this I like and have no problem with. I didn't
realize it would do it at first and when I did, it was a much welcomed
help. Don't see it as being necessary on JT9/65 since you have at least 10
seconds there.
For the auto 60Hz shift on answering CQs, I think this is a bad idea. It
seems like it will cause a LOT of headaches when careless ops don't check
the shift direction and double over someone else's QSO instead of their
own. Seems wrong to risk impacting others' QSOs for the sake of your own.
Just my 2 cents.
73,
KC9SWV - Morgen
President, TARA
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:38 PM, George J Molnar <geo...@molnar.com> wrote:
> I like the feature. Suggestions for its “final”condition include -
>
> 1) May be enabled or disabled by operator
> 2) Apply equally to all modes
> 3) Work only with standard sequence messages
> 4) Require a minimum of one user intervention per contact (logging/reset
> sequence, after 73)
> 5) Support complex callsigns without additional steps
> 6) Define behaviors for multiple caller situations, preferably with user
> definable criteria (weak or strong sign, new DXCC, not worked before, etc.)
>
> Probably a big bite at first, but could be a great help overall.
>
> 73
>
>
> George J Molnar, KF2T
> Nevada, USA
>
>
> On Jul 11, 2017, at 9:26 AM, James Shaver (N2ADV) <n2...@windstream.net>
> wrote:
>
> I think the fact that it's user selectable is important and I agree it
> should be kept because the turnaround time to respond to an inbound message
> is very short (this is especially noticeable for those of us that do 99% of
> our operating remotely where internet connections may prevent successful
> replies in such a short amount of time). Purists can certainly choose to
> not enable the feature but I think it's a nice feature. I also agree with
> disabling the TX once the user hits the "73" in the cycle - user
> intervention is still required which is still important in my opinion.
>
> My 2 cents. :)
>
> 73,
>
> Jim S.
> N2ADV
>
> On Jul 11, 2017, at 12:07 PM, Black Michael via wsjt-devel <
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>
> I did send the patch that fixes that...did you see it?
>
> de Mike W9MDB
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Erik - <erikcarl...@live.com>
> *To:* WSJT software development <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 11, 2017 11:04 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] FT8 and "Call 1st"
>
>
> "We are interested in feedback from users on the question of partial QSO
> automation. Should "Call 1st" be changed or removed?"
>
> I like it as it is. One thing though, it gets broken by callsigns such as
> EA8/G8BCG. When commuted to G8BCG for the QSO, auto sequence stops. Not a
> big deal since reciprocal calls such as this one are not too common. My
> over-riding request is to not remove "Call 1st".
>
> Erik EI4KF.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>
> _______________________________________________
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>
> _______________________________________________
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
