Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mk06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 1B14838000084; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 19:13:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1T9lEs-00018a-9V for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 07 Sep 2012 00:11:58 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1T9lEr-00018R-OZ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 07 Sep 2012 00:11:57 +0100 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.100.212]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1T9lEq-0006jW-7n for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 07 Sep 2012 00:11:56 +0100 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q86NBrFa031816 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 01:11:53 +0200 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id q86NBr7J022615 for ; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 01:11:53 +0200 Message-ID: <50492CFD.1020004@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 01:08:45 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <1346962282.2117.22.camel@linux-laptop> In-Reply-To: <1346962282.2117.22.camel@linux-laptop> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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 Sabine, I've been QRV on that band yesterday to that time but it was 478.7 kHz i think. But it wasn't QRSS, rather OP4, which may be a bit to fast for that spectrogram, obviously. If you like to try in CW or so, we could try on sunday in the late evening, maybe 21 UTC or later? [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [129.206.100.212 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 7aa9ad08848e488e22e0ff1d71f4ef1d Subject: Re: LF: Need better glasses Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d618a50492e2647d2 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi Sabine, I've been QRV on that band yesterday to that time but it was 478.7 kHz i think. But it wasn't QRSS, rather OP4, which may be a bit to fast for that spectrogram, obviously. If you like to try in CW or so, we could try on sunday in the late evening, maybe 21 UTC or later? 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 06.09.2012 22:11, schrieb Sabine DL1DBC: > Hi MF, > > is that one of you guys there on 478,5 kHz? I have problems to read QRSS > on my dumb WSPR screen. > > 73 > Sabine, DL1DBC > >