[OhQP-mail] Fwd: QSO numbers an explanation
n8xx at arrl.org
Sun Jul 8 14:06:50 CDT 2012
Thank you very much for quoting my private message in this reflector.
Very considerate of you.
72/73 de n8xx Hg
On 7/8/2012 11:07 AM, K9TM wrote:
> To all,
> My intention was to explain qso numbers so the concept of qso numbers
> is understood (I didn't invent qso numbers, i'm not trying to justify
> them, just trying to explain them). It was also intended to show that
> the qso number itself is a common topic used elsewhere in life. If
> something can be shown to be like something that is already understood
> then one can more easily understand the topic. Understanding the
> concept is important to coming up with solutions. One has to know
> "what" to do before they can figure out "how" to do it. The original
> email was intended to help understand "what" needs to be done. There
> are so many possible "how" to do it's that we can't possibly iterate
> them all. There isn't a one size fits all solution.
> Setting up a multi transmitter contest station is not simple... from
> an RF perspective or a logging perspective or any perspective. I
> never said multi-transmitter station setup was simple. I said the
> concept of the qso number is simple... until you add a computer and
> software that is not setup to meet the requirements of a
> multi-transmitter setup.
> There are many possible solutions. Solutions are up to the entrant.
> Not all solutions involve computers in real-time.
> Experienced folks are available on the reflector to help but we don't
> know your situation... what equipment do you have, what antennas do
> you have, what operators do you have (are they ssb only cw only or
> ssb/cw ops), what computers do you have, what experience do you have,
> are you using an existing set of antennas or are you setting up from
> scratch, etc, etc.
> The idea behind rules are to present the requirements upon which the
> entrants are judged. It is not to iterate all the possible ways to
> implement the subject matter. OhQP rules are consistent with other
> major contest rules.
> As always if anyone is interested in obtaining help, dump the question
> out on the reflector. There are many people on the reflector who are
> willing to help. It helps if you ask a question rather than treating
> the reflector as your own personal blog stating how things should be
> done in the world according to you (this kind of post will result in
> read the manual answers). There are some who will criticize whatever
> you put out (it's the same handful of people all the time that never
> have anything good to say, it won't take you long to figure out who
> they are).
> My only intention in saying that I've been able to solve these issues
> is to say that there are solutions. It's not to say I'm any better or
> worse than anyone else. It's not to say that my solutions are the
> only solutions. Just to say there are solutions but you have to be
> persistent and have to be creative and have to be willing to invest
> time, effort and money. If you are looking for an off the shelf
> simple solution to life's challenges... you'll likely be frustrated.
> If you're willing to spend some time and effort you can work
> something out that will allow you to get involved and have fun.
> Planning/Building the station is half the fun. Operating the station
> is the other half of the fun. The sense of satisfaction derived from
> planning, building and operating is priceless. You will always come
> away with things that work and things that didn't work and this
> changes every year. That's part of the fun and what keeps us coming
> back year after year.
> I tend to be a person who helps people learn to fish rather than
> feeding them a fish dinner. This approach apparently bothers some who
> just want to be fed fish dinner for life. Basically, I don't want to
> tell anyone what to do. I'll help figure out what to do, if asked,
> but I'm not going to tell you what to do. It's your operation.
> Good luck however you choose to operate OhQP. The important thing is
> to get on and have fun.
> As always donating my time and technical abilities to try and help
> make the OhQP/MiQP/MRRC better for all.
> 73, Tim K9TM
> *From: *Hank Greeb <n8xx at arrl.org <mailto:n8xx at arrl.org>>
> *Date: *July 7, 2012 10:55:12 PM EDT
> *To: *K9TM <k9tm at buckeye-express.com <mailto:k9tm at buckeye-express.com>>
> *Subject: **Re: [OhQP-mail] QSO numbers an explanation*
> It would be very simple to say in the OHQP rules:
> "With whatever logging system is used, be very careful that there are
> no duplicate numbers assigned to contacts for any band/mode."
> Explaining several ways to "make the kludge" of non networked software
> work in a multi-multi environment would be useful. Saying they MUST
> use a separate numbering system for each band and mode presents a BIG
> obstacle to many folks.
> Or, you could change the rules so "5NN COUNty" was the exchange, which
> would solve the entire problem.
More information about the OhQP-mail