From: codella@codella.watson.ibm.com (Chris Codella)
Subject: Re: DXers
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 19:11:29 GMT
Reply-To: codella@watson.ibm.com
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research Center

I guess I've seen enough of this kind of "I don't like it, so get rid of it"
kind of posting that I feel compelled to respond.  This isn't directed just at
you Jim but at the general attitude of intolerance which some people have, and
which has no place in amateur radio.  Your posting had some good suggestions, I
just want to separate out the silliness.

In article <BzMHun.KtD@hfglobe.intel.com>, zardoz@hfglobe.intel.com (Jim
Garver) writes:
|> As a long time ragchewer, both phone and CW, I'd like to post my two bits
|> on my passive resistance techniques for dealing with contesters and DX'ers.
|> 

As a long time ragchewer AND DX'er AND part time contester, I submit that there
ia no need for "passive resistance" since nobody is forcing you to do anything.
As in any group there are some jerks but the vast majority of contesters and
DX'ers are some of the best operators, and nicest people there are.  You'd
certainly never hear them talking about "dealing with rag-chewers."

|> 1) Never, ever give out a 5X9 or 5NN signal report.  The stigma that the
|> contesters and DX'ers have left on this leads me and many others to believe
|> that a 5X9 report is a lie.  Use "loud and clear", 5X8, "20 over", or
whatever
|> suits you but don't use 5X9.  The highest value in air traffic control
|> language is 5X5.  Maybe use that.
|> 

The observation is valid.  5NN in many contests is meaningless.  However, the
conclusion that 5X9 in a normal contact is also meaningless is just not true.
There's lots of debate about changing the RST system to something more up to
date.  "Loud and clear" on a QSL card is meaningless.

|> 2) Call "CQ Ragchew" in the middle of the contesters.  I have answered
|> several calls of desperation like this.  We always had a good chat despite
|> the QRM.  If possible, "GO QRO".

CQ Ragchew or something like it is actually is a good suggestion, but not the
way you suggest it.  If you don't want contesters to call you then this is what
to do.  To do so right in the middle of the most heavily used part of the band
is contradictory to the intent (not to mention dumb).  On a crowded freeway at
rush hour, do you advocate slowing down and driving 20mph slower than everybody
else just to make the point that you don't like it?

|> 3) If the band is open and the DX is rolling in, try to find a quiet spot
|> and wait there.  Often a DX will appear with his first CQ and you can pounce
|> on him.  I have had some great ragchews with DX this way because they are
|> often untired and fresh for a chat.  Meanwhile the pent-up pile up gathers.
|> If he won't at least chat about antennas or weather then don't log it.
|> It wasn't a real contact anyway. 

This started out sounding good but...  That last sentence is just plain silly!
I can't actually believe you mean this.
 
|> 4) If the contesters or DX'ers have taken over the band go to AM mode
or else
|> 12 meters.  There are AM calling frequencies on all the bands now.  I prefer
|> 10 meters from 29.0 to 29.1 and above.  FM may be okay also.
|> Last I checked, contesters and their ilk were being actively discouraged
|> from infesting the 12 meter band.  Let's hope it stays this way.

This sounds fairly reasonable too (except for the AM part).  Most if not all
contests expressly exclude the WARC bands.

_ . . . _

Look, there's so much to do in this hobby that it staggers the mind.  It's
what's kept me interested in it for 24 years.  If you're not interested in one
aspect, don't knock it, don't try to argue that it should be done away with,
don't make suggestions which heighten rather than ease tension.  Don't even
think that an activity which you don't happen to like can't be justified (it
usually can be, maybe more so than your kind of activity).   If you don't like
an aspect of the hobby, just don't do it.

73,
Chris, W2PA
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc