Message-ID: <3860FE96.B75A44DF@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 16:38:46 +0000
From: "malcolmg3kev" <malcolmg3kev@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Organization: Netscape Online member
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: qrss
References: <199912201532_MC2-91D7-FE0A@compuserve.com> <3.0.1.16.19991222105501.2edf4262@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>


Rik Strobbe wrote:

> At 18:48 21/12/99 +0000, G3KEV wrote:
> >Hi Geri. Qrss is discouraging experimenters from improving their antennas,
> >receivers and associated equipment to make a normal aural qso. It is also
> >encouraging nodding off (sleeping) during the hours that it takes to get a
> MMM.
> >OOO, OXO etc
> >I hope the lazy mans cw will not prevail above 20 khz !!!
>
> Hello Mal,
>
> I am very sorry but I do not understand the reason of your anti-QRSS (or
> DFCW) campaign

> How can a debate or point of view be seen as being an ANTI CAMPAIN. This
> medium is exactly for that purpose to debate and discuss for instance the
> merits of different MODES of communication. I am neither for or against QRSS
> or any other mode but condider that I am entitled to make an observation
> about a mode on a band that I use.

73 de MAL/G3KEV


>
> First of all using exteme narrowband modes is only one way of improving the
> distance you can cover, next to improving antenna and equipement. So it
> will nit stop experimenters from trying to improve anything.
> Also you are overestimating the duration of a QRSS QSO, it can be done in
> about 30 minutes. Using DFCW, a standard QSO needs only about 10 minutes,
> to be honest I have heard a lot of "normal CW" QSO's on 136kHz where due to
> poor S/N the calls, reports etc. had to be repeated over and over again
> resulting in a QSO duration far longer than 10 minutes. In these cases the
> use of DFCW might even had speed up things.
> Finally, nobody is forced to use QRSS and/or DFCW. Those who are happy with
> normal CW only can do so. But those who want to experiment with new modes
> should not be treated as a kind of second class hams, calling QRSS 'lazy
> mans CW' is just not fair.
>
> Merry Christmas and happy New Year to all readers of this reflector.
>
> 73, Rik