Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26240 invoked from network); 11 Apr 2003 17:52:27 -0000 Received: from netmail02.services.quay.plus.net (212.159.14.221) by mailstore with SMTP; 11 Apr 2003 17:52:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 5022 invoked by uid 10001); 11 Apr 2003 17:52:27 -0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by netmail02.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 11 Apr 2003 17:52:27 -0000 X-SQ: A Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1942gc-00039H-Sq for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 18:51:38 +0100 Received: from [194.73.73.147] (helo=einsteinium.btinternet.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1942gX-000398-Vv for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 18:51:34 +0100 Received: from host217-35-41-67.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([217.35.41.67] helo=dellboy) by einsteinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #23) id 1942gX-0003OX-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 18:51:33 +0100 Message-ID: <001401c30053$28dccb30$1b00a8c0@dellboy> From: "Dave Pick" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <000301c30033$554c4620$1cd1fc3e@l8p8y6> <004801c3004e$817e6820$2602a8c0@WorkGroup> <003301c30050$fffa8e20$09dc9384@jka> Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 18:52:41 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: CE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.6 required=5.0tests=REFERENCESversion=2.51 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.51 (1.174.2.5-2003-03-20-exp) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false The only thing wrong with this is that you don't know whether you've stumbled on part of a QSO or a call... although it is a technique I have used for years (I rarely call CQ EXCEPT on LF!). I liked the "KA" idea. I also agree with Mike's suggestion of "Q" for quicker and "S" for slower. Dave G3YXM. > It would seem to me that just sending one's callsign followed by "K" would > be an invitation for anyone to go ahead. The "K" would differentiate this > from a beacon where no command is given. > > John Andrews, W1TAG > > > > >