Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mc01.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 5C103380000C9; Thu, 16 May 2013 10:47:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1UczST-0000yQ-1y for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 16 May 2013 15:47:05 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1UczSS-0000yH-MB for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 16 May 2013 15:47:04 +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 1UczSR-0004Kk-4u for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 16 May 2013 15:47:03 +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 r4GEkffu014268 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 16 May 2013 16:46:42 +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 r4GEkfgb021597 for ; Thu, 16 May 2013 16:46:41 +0200 Message-ID: <5194F14C.7060004@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 16:46:36 +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: , <5194AD6A.8835.195E52@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com>, <5194D116.2010708@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <5194EE7F.5806.1179AEB@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: <5194EE7F.5806.1179AEB@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com> X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) 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: Tnx Mike, Then it must have been DF2JP i guess. 73, Stefan [...] Content analysis details: (-1.3 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] -0.6 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 4ead635eadbaebfaa92cfec77deb715d Subject: Re: LF: CW 136.8 test 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: 3039ac1d60495194f195768b X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Tnx Mike, Then it must have been DF2JP i guess. 73, Stefan Am 16.05.2013 15:34, schrieb Mike Dennison: >> There was another station on 137.64 kHz, TXing OP8, yesterday in the >> evening. That signal was well audible as well. Who was it? Maybe >> DF2JP? If so, i didn't know that his signal is so strong. Hopefully he >> is a CW-man (too). >> > Stefan, > > Active Op8 stations yesterday were PA0WMR, G8HUH and myself. DF2JP > was monitoring but I did not receive anything from him. > > Mike, G3XDV >