Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp201694igc; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 02:06:41 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.71.47 with SMTP id r15mr6941677wju.19.1394014001299; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 02:06:41 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id o8si1799762wjo.93.2014.03.05.02.06.38 for ; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 02:06:40 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; dkim=fail (test mode) header.i=@btinternet.com Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1WL8FD-0001Le-KI for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 09:36:07 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1WL8FD-0001LV-3w for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 09:36:07 +0000 Received: from smtpout09.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk ([65.20.0.129]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1WL8FB-0004ke-9a for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 09:36:06 +0000 X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A090209.5316F004.0049,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0 X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=8/97,refid=2.7.2:2014.3.4.170616:17:8.317,ip=,rules=__HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, INVALID_MSGID_NO_FQDN, __MSGID_32HEX, __HAS_FROM, __PHISH_FROM2, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL_FROM, FROM_NAME_ONE_WORD, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __MIME_VERSION, __CT, __CTYPE_MULTIPART_ALT, __CTYPE_HAS_BOUNDARY, __CTYPE_MULTIPART, __HAS_X_PRIORITY, __HAS_MSMAIL_PRI, __HAS_X_MAILER, USER_AGENT_OE, __OUTLOOK_MUA_1, __USER_AGENT_MS_GENERIC, __INT_PROD_TV, SUPERLONG_LINE, __HAS_HTML, HTML_NO_HTTP, BODY_SIZE_4000_4999, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, BODYTEXTH_SIZE_10000_LESS, __MIME_HTML, __TAG_EXISTS_HTML, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, __PHISH_FROM, __OUTLOOK_MUA, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS, NO_URI_FOUND X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown Received: from IBM7FFA209F07C (109.152.150.185) by smtpout09.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk (8.6.100.99.10223) (authenticated as c.ashby435@btinternet.com) id 53160DC6000A1BFB for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 09:36:03 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=btcpcloud; t=1394012165; bh=AULg3ZlZesOTcNdFrQIhnhhEHRia4qx6bsXG3bxs/Bo=; h=Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer; b=vFjUEzq1qCFmsBTtPTGXig1kXH7Pde7mGauDXzzoBT6LkAEqMdmB62alid2okAGrolIQXPmB3+5c550TzmUXG/mMqCUuDzIaoVYxwN/03A99naanZBM3HAFgKN7SwINrQX+miGdIXtcxFdRNKYoEoPdjYsiv/FQB3DtpS8GfQg8= Message-ID: <92AA0A6973FA44108D5D0B6483283319@IBM7FFA209F07C> From: "Chris" To: "RSGB LF Group" Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 09:36:04 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hi All, There have been questions lately about lack of activity, Steinar suggests "Yes, lack of interest". I am not so sure that is the case. I agree with the comments about too many modes and would also add lack of publicity as to where each mode resides on the LF bands. The casual listener, who might well take an interest but is not on this reflector, is likely to quickly lose enthusiasm. Also, whilst I am all for the spirit of experimentation, just maybe the increased use of much lower frequencies has added to the problem by spreading activity so thinly. Another BIG problem, often overlooked by people making comments about other's lack of receive capability, the increasing noise/crud level from things like TVs, LED lights etc. Then there's the CW operator who sends so fast you can't even read his callsign (DF5QG - sorry!) and only appears to listen on another band, a band I don't use. Wolf has been doing a great job with WSQ, several of us locally have been testing his modified version which works well - on topband. I would suggest this mode is potentially ideally suited to LF and gets us away from the 'beacon' modes so frequently criticised on here. I am frequently monitoring the 472kHz band - when LED lights permit - and look forward to things settling down as the year progresses. Vy 73, Chris, G4AYT, Whitstable, Kent, JO01MI. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [65.20.0.129 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: ad8e5dd63f7497fd9d71d15044db2e2b Subject: LF: Acivity etc. Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0044_01CF3856.540C2A20" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.9 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK, FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01CF3856.540C2A20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi All, There have been questions lately about lack of activity, Steinar = suggests "Yes, lack of interest". I am not so sure that is the case. I agree with the comments about too many modes and would also add lack = of publicity as to where each mode resides on the LF bands. The casual = listener, who might well take an interest but is not on this reflector, = is likely to quickly lose enthusiasm. Also, whilst I am all for the spirit of experimentation, just maybe the = increased use of much lower frequencies has added to the problem by = spreading activity so thinly. Another BIG problem, often overlooked by people making comments about = other's lack of receive capability, the increasing noise/crud level from = things like TVs, LED lights etc. Then there's the CW operator who sends so fast you can't even read his = callsign (DF5QG - sorry!) and only appears to listen on another band, a = band I don't use. Wolf has been doing a great job with WSQ, several of us locally have = been testing his modified version which works well - on topband. I would = suggest this mode is potentially ideally suited to LF and gets us away = from the 'beacon' modes so frequently criticised on here. I am frequently monitoring the 472kHz band - when LED lights permit - = and look forward to things settling down as the year progresses. Vy 73, Chris, G4AYT, Whitstable, Kent, JO01MI. ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01CF3856.540C2A20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi All,
There have been questions lately about = lack of=20 activity, Steinar suggests "Yes, = lack of=20 interest".
I am not so sure that is the=20 case.
I agree with the comments about too = many modes and=20 would also add lack of publicity as to where each mode resides on the LF = bands.=20 The casual listener, who might well take an interest but is not on this=20 reflector, is likely to quickly lose enthusiasm.
Also, whilst I am all for the spirit of = experimentation, just maybe the increased use of much lower frequencies = has=20 added to the problem by spreading activity so thinly.
Another BIG problem, often = overlooked by=20 people making comments about other's lack of receive capability, the = increasing=20 noise/crud level from things like TVs, LED lights = etc.
Then there's the CW operator who = sends so=20 fast you can't even read his callsign (DF5QG - sorry!) and only appears = to=20 listen on another band, a band I don't use.
Wolf has been doing a great job = with WSQ,=20 several of us locally have been testing his modified version which works = well -=20 on topband. I would suggest this mode is potentially ideally suited to = LF and=20 gets us away from the 'beacon' modes so frequently criticised on=20 here.
I am frequently monitoring the = 472kHz band -=20 when LED lights permit - and look forward to things settling down as the = year=20 progresses.
Vy 73,
Chris, G4AYT, Whitstable, Kent,=20 JO01MI.
------=_NextPart_000_0044_01CF3856.540C2A20--