[Moon] FW: [Moon-net] (no subject)

[on4dpx Kenny]

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: on4dpx Kenny [mailto:on4dpx at skynet.be] 
Verzonden: woensdag 16 april 2008 21:28
Aan: 'DF2ZC (Bernd)'
Onderwerp: RE: [Moon-net] (no subject)

Bernd , 

If you say that we need to know how correlation Works and the basics of
information theory are to work EME with JT65 , then they are probably only a
few ( lets say 2 persons so far ) that really know how it works . 

As far as I remember in the old days they didn’t need to know all this crap
, just CW and that’s it . 

Any newcomer in the old days could only make a few mistakes : 

- wrong sequence 
- wrong qso procedure 

All those mistakes are solved during the qso without interaction of an
internet connection , logger or whatever now is needed to make that
fantastic qso . 

If you want to guide newcomers to EME do it the correct way and say that
they need to read the manual , as this is whats needed to make a qso with a
digital communication tool .

At least that lie is often used , I was guiding a newcomer ... to make a
cover for there cheat qso ... I have some examples of people explaning the
same crap as you did ... how could that be possible ??  

Did you ever asked that newcomer if he would like to try CW ? Ofcourse not
because the change of missing that qso would be to large compared to JT . 
Just because of the inexperience of the constant JT user and no fallback as
the call database and logger ... 

Maybe you don't read very carefully that blog in northern Sweden , I don't
doubt you don't read as it a pain in the ass for JT people , but it has
never quoted or discussed or joked with a newcomers inexperience ... at
least for a CW inexperienced operator ... wondering why ??? Because that guy
behind the CWISKINGHALLELUJAH blog has the respect for those trying it the
correct way .

JT people are getting blind for there own errors , sadly enough . 

I agree that there are always cheaters but its sad that 70% of the 2m EME
stations are cheating , to be more accurate that 70% are the JT users . 

I do not agree that wsjt made EME a big improvement or as you say a huge
step forward . 
For example if , I really mean IF , its possible that JT can make a valid
and complete qso with 2 station running extremely marginal equipment as you
stated then this is not a huge step forward . 
This means then that EME has become easy as 1 2 3 , that there is no effort
anymore needed to be able to get on the block and play EME . 
Where is the technical challenge ??? Where is the effort ??? Where is the
selfrespect to be able to learn and improve ??? 
It's gone my friend ... simply gone ... 

I'm one of those ham operators that needed to pass an electronic test at an
engineering level ,which I'm proud of, to obtain my licence , I'm one of
those thousands of guys that enjoy building and engineering and solving
problems and improving day by day. 
This was my challenge when I started EME , not to run some kind of software
and working 100 different countries in 1 year , or knocking of every exotic
expedition after another one , to finally realize that the whole thing I did
was fake or relied on cheats ... 

It sad that we made such an evolution today , that evolution that you call "
a huge step forward " . 

Perhaps one day the "EME kit" will be offered , a kit containing a super
deluxe and extremely fast computer running WSJT together with a 4elem yagi
and a 50W transceiver . 
Oh and don't forget , band of operation needs to be defined before ordering
... 

Good luck ,
Kenny ON4DPX


-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net
[mailto:moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net] Namens DF2ZC (Bernd)
Verzonden: woensdag 16 april 2008 8:18
Aan: moon-net at list-serv.davidv.net
Onderwerp: Re: [Moon-net] (no subject)

Hello All,

There is no point talking away that the ARRL not at all did a good job
compiling the results of the recent EME contest, for whatever reasons. I
personally believe it is mainly organisational trouble in the contest branch
which hopefully will be resolved by this year's contest.

However, some "special friends" again use this as a plattform to intrigue
against JT65 - the author and the users altogether, as usual by by repeating
false statements instead of hard facts. 

Dear Dominique, I understand that you are not happy with the introduction of
WSJT as it has braught EME a huge step forward. The activity has
substantially increased as on 2m stations with just 100 watts and a 13 dBd
yagi can now successfully work most of the 4 yagi stations. This is of no
thrill for you...of course. It is of no thrill that many more DXCCs are QRV
now, that many HF focussed dxpeditions now also take a 2m gear with them.
Yes...DXCC has become easier to achieve, I concede this. You don't like and
don't want this. It is sad that you call this advancement a damage to EME.

I fully understand you and others who say I do want to copy my QSO partner
with my ears instead of using modern correlation schemes to decode signals
buried in the noise. That is perfectly o.k.

I do not at all understand how you - who like your fellows apparently has
not at all grasped how JT65 DS works, how correlation works, what the basics
of information theory are - still continue repeating false statements such
as below. That is just ridiculous. It is as ridiculous as it is no longer
possible to give a newcomer some guidance how to use the QSO procedure
correctly (as I have recently done asking a station to start over again)
without appearing on the CWISKINGHALLELUJAH blog in Northern Sweden. It is
as ridculous as quoting every mistake a newcomer made due to inexperience
and generalising this for all JT65 DS users. It is as ridiculous as secretly
watching loggers gnashing your teeth for other's mistakes.

Sadly there were and there are always times people cheated, in any mode. It
is a question of character not of mode. Those who are happy working a new
grid or DXCC or achieving a good position on the contest results list by
illegal means are just poor guys... 

vy 73 Bernd DF2ZC (JO30RN)
www.df2zc.de

____________________________________________
144 MHz EME NewsLetter:
www.df2zc.de/newsletter

144 MHz DXCC #21
144 MHz WAC

Kenwood TS 2000
2 x GU74b by LZ2US
4 x 2M18XXX 21 dBd full elevation


-----Original Message-----
From: moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net
[mailto:moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net] On Behalf Of Dominique
Fässler / HB9BBD
Sent: Dienstag, 15. April 2008 20:41
To: moon-net at list-serv.davidv.net
Subject: Re: [Moon-net] (no subject)

It is very sad indeed to see the systematic cheating by claimed QSO's which
have never been made, diluting all toplists and firsts between countries,
DXCC diplomas have definitely lost their value since cheating has become
integrated in the software used and chat rooms replaced the need for having
the moon above horizon and still claiming QSO's.
I did not send in a log to ARRL and I will not in the future. The lists of
firsts between countries is obsolete because it lists QSO0's between files
on harddisks rather than travelled information off the moon.
Initial lists did not do better and are of no value any more. It seems to me
we are playing tennis without a net because some feel that it is too hard to
play tennis with a net. Everything is allowed and thus the thrill of EME is
gone. So Sad!!!!
You don’t need to be a Nobel-Price winner to realize the damage brought to
EME by all the sick ways of cheating up on the various lists under the myth
of being smarter than the rest of us.
73 HB9BBD


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: moon-bounces at moonbounce.info [mailto:moon-bounces at moonbounce.info] Im
Auftrag von Peter Sundberg
Gesendet: Dienstag, 15. April 2008 18:57
An: moon at moonbounce.info
Betreff: [Moon] ARRL EME Contest

I can remember when the ARRL EME Competition was the highlight of the year
for moonbouncers. The rules were clear, and easy to understand. Reading the
results and comments in QST was something to look forward to, and
achievements were never questioned, insted they encouraged us mere mortals
to push on forward, and improve our stations and operating practices.

Not so any more... the way the contest is handled is a total insult to those
participating, especially those who praise fair game and contesting. 

Why have we seen this transformation from a highly respected event to an
embarrassing soap opera? 

Well, the reason is clear, it's because of the constant maneuvering with new
rules, and the total lack of enforcement of rules.

A bit of background information:

After the 2006 EME contest I sent a formal protest to the contest committee
regarding stations who openly violated the rules. I also forwarded a number
of logger and cluster extracts to show the committee what had been going on,
and pinpointed the violations in these documents. This was also the sole
reason for me entering "Assisted" category that year, as I had been
monitoring loggers and clusters (of no use to me as a CW operator).

A while later, I was sent the full contest database, with the request to
help identify the stations who were violating the rules. I did so, and sent
the information back to the ARRL, hoping for a bit of correspondence
regarding this issue. I received an acknowledgement that they had received
the information.

When the results were finally published, I discovered that a number of
stations had been moved to "Check Log", instead of being disqualified. As we
all know, K1JT has been telling us that HE (and only he) examined the
contest results, in search for violations of the rules. This he said, was in
the interest of keeping it a fair game, and to enforce the rules.

Well, the only thing he did was to save his friends from the embarrassment
of being disqualified, so it is clear that some officials at the ARRL are
not at all interested in a fair game.

Why bring this up at this point then? 

Well, only to point at the fact that since 2006 the same person responsible
for the above blocking of rule enforcement was involved in yet another
revision of the contest rules, namely in 2007. 

Too eager to share the thoughts with the community, K1JT presented the new
rules even before the ARRL had them on their website. The analyzis of the
rules presented together with (one) version of the results is clear, and on
the ARRL webpage we can read the following statemend from Ward N0AX:

"144 categories, to be exact. Only 28 categories had entries from a total of
184 entries, so perhaps this pie is being sliced a bit too narrowly?"

So, is there a reason for creating so many categories..?? Of course there
is, everything is now so sliced up that a disqualification should not be an
issue any more, as no one has the ability to understand the rules any more.
Let alone send a formal protest..

Am I wrong in drawing these conclusisons...?  

Don't think so.. not even the ARRL have been able to present the correct
results, despit many attempts. And the results published in QST Magazine
still stands as the only printed results, and they will probably never be
corrected. Why embarrass even more people by putting it right?

My "verdict" over all of this is, that when we let one man dominate EME, and
decide for all others, this is what to expect! 

These actions are not possible to sweep under the carpet, because the
contest is ruined for all future as it seems now. There will still be people
entering the contest, of course, but it is not a contest any more.
It is a joke of a contest, serving no purpose other than acting as an
activity enhancer. 

This is good however, we need stations populating our bands. But the so
called records set under present circumstances have absolutely NO value, and
are not to be compared to the records set when the ARRL EME Competition was
a true contest, based on a fair game for everyone.

Let's not be fooled into thinking something else.

CW is King!

73 de Peter SM2CEW
www.sm2cew.com
http://blog.sm2cew.com

-- 
Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen! 
Ideal für Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer

_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html