The digital modes have to many lids.

Discussion in 'Becoming an Amateur Radio Operator/Upgrading Privi' started by NP4JS, Sep 27, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
  1. NP4JS

    NP4JS Ham Member QRZ Page

    To the digital operators. LISTEN BEFORE YOU JUST START TRANSMITTING! Just because you do not know CW does not give you the right to take over any frequency you want. If you insist on being a LID then please turn in your ticket so that someone who really knows what sharing a part of the band means. For some reason you all think that you have all the rights in the hobby. I had to master the Morse Code before I could get my Extra ticket. All you have to master is something a 10 year old can do.

    OK let the comments fly. I just hope some of the other CW operators out there chime in here. You all know that the 40 meter sub band is about to be lost to CW because this bully tactic that is going on by the Digital operators.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2009
  2. dulhugtri

    dulhugtri QRZ Member

    Glad to hear you're using this: I plan to keep it much more aggressively up-to-date than has been the case in the past, but don't hesitate to let me know if you find errors or need clarifications.;)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 28, 2009
  3. W4RLR

    W4RLR Ham Member QRZ Page

    What a load of crap. I had to put my hip waders on before I posted.

    Let's see your logic. Digital operator = no code = lid.

    Yup, you fit the stereotype of the crusty old ham who screams "get off my lawn" to the neighborhood kids and thinks anyone who didn't sit before a dour FCC examiner cheated to get their ham ticket. Thankfully, most of the hams I have met in the real world do not have your poisonous mindset. An amateur is supposed to be friendly. You come across as someone as friendly as Scrooge before he saw the ghosts.

    NO ONE has the right to a particular frequency. So sorry that you feel entitled because you have been a ham for years and you know Morse code. Good for you. There are more lids on 75 that know code than Carter has liver pills, but I don't put a post on the 'Zed painting all veteran hams with a broad brush like you have done. We SHARE the frequencies allotted to the amateur service, and if certain operators are putting a bee in your bonnet because they have upset the balance of your little world, use the big knob and change frequency like you were taught when YOU were a neophyte ham.

    I ought to turn you in to the ASPCA for flagrantly abusing the dead equine of "I know Morse and those who don't are everything that is wrong with amateur radio".

    Of course, I can't send Morse to save my life, so my opinion doesn't count in your eyes. I'm not a "real ham" to you. I can't tell you the amount of sleep I lose every night knowing you don't think much of me. NOT.
     
  4. KB1NXE

    KB1NXE Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Rich,

    Well said. Also, I wouldn't pay too much attention to the OF OP.

    I wonder if he belongs to one of the nets who must have paid someone rent for their frequencies and will tune up on and jam a QSO rather than break in and POLITELY ask if they could QSY as they have a recurring net. That mindset will make me not want to move. ;)
     
  5. K9ZMD

    K9ZMD Subscriber QRZ Page

    Around the Barn, Then Back On-Topic

    Excuse me? RLR, were you responding to something that troubled you in the second post (which Fred may have later truncated into irrelevancy)? I hope so, because the OP was about digimode operators starting up on top of CW QSO's in progress. That, in anyone's book, is LID behavior, and the OT didn't deserve the ration that you handed out.

    Or were you peeved because the OT was less than tactful when explaining that inability to understand code is no excuse, much less justification, for LID behavior? The fact is, he was right. A CW signal is a VISIBLE and RECOGNIZABLE trace on waterfalls, and the CW contact in progress does actually have a prior claim to the frequency. If a digimode operator fires up on top of that contact, then the digimode operator is the violator. Them's the facts and it matters not if either operator is a crusty OF or a wet behind the ears pup.

    Or maybe it was this bit that tripped your trigger?
    Yeah, I don't think I would have said that. That last line unfairly implies that all digimode operators are newbies who only had to memorize spoon fed Q & A's in order to get their license. Bad on him; better if he'd stopped while he was still on solid ground with his specific example of LID behavior. Everyone knows that some wet behind the ears pups are actually quite good operators, and certainly there are some crusty OF's who operate digimodes (heh heh, I myself am one of them digimoding OF's when I'm not pounding brass).

    But after that, it seems, is when the misrepresenting, stereotyping, name-calling, and leaping-to-conclusions began:
    Nope. He never said that. In fact, he clearly pointed out that certain IMPROPER BEHAVIOR = LID.
    What part of the OP gave you the license to stereotype anyone? Besides, you say "crusty old ham" like that's a bad thing. Dang, I resemble that!
    Whoa now, getting little carried away there aren't you? Fact is, I'm finding more evidence of that in your post than in the OP. Lots more.
    Nope, not at all what he said. The OP made it clear that he felt entitled to the frequency because he was already in QSO there. That's the way it works.
    Heh heh, liver pills. I like that subtle poke at geriatric nets, but what part of that pertains to a LID firing up his digimode signal atop an ongoing CW contact?
    Why the quotes? Those words weren't in the OP, were they? Did you maybe read the OT's mind, or did you just misrepresent the words that were actually in the OP?
    OK, OK, I believe you already; I understand you don't feel at all inferior about being a no-code ham. Good for you, I really have no problem with that. But tone it down a little . . . cynics might take that last over-the-top bit as being a touch defensive.

    In conclusion, RLR, you were absolutely correct when you stated, "We SHARE the frequencies allotted to the amateur service", and that convinces me you would agree that part of sharing is observing operating courtesy and protocol. With that thought in mind, I'd like to know where you stand on the original topic in this thread. Do you, or do you not, consider it discourteous and a breech of protocol to fire up a digimode signal on top of an ongoing contact of any mode? 73

    Gary, K9ZMD/6
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2009
  6. KC9IUX

    KC9IUX Ham Member QRZ Page

    The insult about no code was more than implied.

    A holier than thou type of crap.

    It taints his otherwise valid complaint.

    I use PSK31 and see alot of horribly wide signals that wipe out my AGC.

    I don't think they are aware, we need to help them.

    I also think it bad practice to encroach on CW allotments.

    While the original post has a valid complaint, don't paint with such a wide brush.

    Make allies, not enemies.
     
  7. NP4JS

    NP4JS Ham Member QRZ Page

    From the post of K9ZMD this is the only one that is something I said.

    Originally Posted by WY9J [​IMG]
    . . . I had to master the Morse Code before I could get my Extra ticket. All you have to master is something a 10 year old can do.

    Not for sure how the others got my call attached to them.

    By the way if one only comments on things with sugar and candy coating all you will get is flies. If you are not an offender then be a defender and stop killing the messenger. This post was intended to bring out the fact that there is a real problem that needs to be addressed. And by the way there are only 2 modes that can operate anywhere on the Ham bands. Digital and CW (Except for 60 meters). Check your band plains.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2009
  8. W6ONV

    W6ONV Ham Member QRZ Page

    I will consider myself still new to HF and I was excited to get on HF using digital modes when I started. PSK31, which is rather simple to understand and nearly as easy to set up was where I began.

    It was not long before I read more and logged more QSOs I became more aware of keeping a clean signal. An RST report did not really help me. I did have some ops who e-mailed me images of my signal and/or provided an IMD reading. Both of which helped me clean up my signal.

    I think educating operators, both new and old to the correct use of digital modes is always a good idea. I started on HF after I got my Extra and before I learned Morse code, not that it means anything. I had an easier time using CW than I did some digital modes like PSK, RTTY or FH. Now that I have had experience with all of them I hope to help other clean up their signals.



     
  9. K0RGR

    K0RGR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Hey moderators - this doesn't belong in the Elmer section - please move it to Opinions where it won't scare newbies into thinking that all OT's are total jerks.

    This weekend was one of the big RTTY contests, and yes, the RTTY contesters tend to take over the bands. With all of us squeezed into tiny segments of 80, 40 and 20, QRM is going to happen.

    It has nothing to do with code/no-code - I doubt that most RTTYers are no-coders. It's more about people using receivers with wide filters on both modes.
     
  10. KF2M

    KF2M Ham Member QRZ Page

    To be fair perhaps the offending station(s) did not hear you. That is a possibility. But I have experienced, and seen digi-lid behavior on the bands as well. Being a digital mode operator myself. I've had QSO's interfered with by splatter, signal images, being too close, or just outright transmitting on top of either myself, or my contacts signal. Sometimes I wonder if some the offending operators even bother to look at their ALC readings, much less look at there waterfall. But not all digital ops are bad operators. The vast majority of us are considerate operators(or at least I hope).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: Morse-1