Return-Path: Received: from rly-df09.mx.aol.com (rly-df09.mail.aol.com [172.19.156.22]) by air-df07.mail.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILINDF074-5794b07f0de6; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:53:57 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-df09.mx.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDF096-5794b07f0de6; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:53:36 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1NBqOP-0005S4-1q for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:52:49 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1NBqOO-0005Rv-KU for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:52:48 +0000 Received: from mail-fx0-f211.google.com ([209.85.220.211]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NBqOM-0008FJ-Q6 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:52:48 +0000 Received: by fxm3 with SMTP id 3so4651971fxm.4 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:52:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=7V/3FYpV91pXYrqerPZGzHGZl/L1LRZ3+iQSCqBa+RU=; b=rxc8spfQSkeUlnb2hXwj3WK6/5m5lA2HDs/VC1IGr+LNFyVvXRJJKkzHt7AhcmlnCX HyZZW4P/zAP6LCDSdwXSfbNEftaH65jseqX08i06SVZ4jIo1HXf8HMrsR3KAhEGO8Un+ JMupxEldigji5kUPXTAxbwrkqwxBGYotk6sFk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Y5ZwAGyA/FyURfw1zQOIn718hl/kGMp0gE03Wejdbs1/P0mDl1ER2xCYfwBrQ4CjGN UlQO41+5b5k7MU4kZxAFyQxzYOhAOWCivfdokwL9KuoIEXNdh/eR5pKHnnkf3nzjNKyg Hcht5rmaVG8q/bZrhhWGyxex+I1bpkR5Wdhh8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.163.205 with SMTP id q13mr270709hbd.132.1258811560778; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:52:40 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4B07ABA4.4060102@online.fr> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:52:40 +0000 Message-ID: From: Andy Talbot To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Karma: unknown: DomainKey-Status: good (testing) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: WSPR : QSO or not QSO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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 X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-d305.2 ; domain : googlemail.com DKIM : pass X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) CanI suggest you read thoroughly the documentation on how the mode works before making claims about the database.and validity. The database can only be updated by stations decoding and reportoing, and if each QSO partner has a reciprocal report in the database for near-adjacent time intervals , then they MUST have been in contact with eachother and cannot be classed as anything bu a valid QSO. Its impossible to have achieved this in any other way. Please read all the documentation first. Andy www.g4jnt.com This email has been scanned for damaging side-effects by the health and safety police 2009/11/21 Wolf Ostwald : > Hello group ! > > > > I am not an expert with WSPR at all. But I followed the discussion regar= ding > false detection of calls thru the database. > > To my understanding the WSPR operator has NO way to really find out whet= her > the computer came to the right conclusion about the calls received, or > whether it just judged by means of plausibility. We humans have no sense= for > phaseshift, that means we have to believe the machine. > > I think that the database in the background is like a walking stick for= the > blind. > > Of course it=92s a new and exciting technology, but I doubt that it is= on one > and the same level with a regular exchange and therefore should not be > considered equally verifying a valid contact. > > My two pence worth=A0=A0 de wolf=A0 df2py > >