[OhQP-mail] Fwd: QSO numbers an explanation

Hank Greeb 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*
> Tim:
> 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.
> <snip>

More information about the OhQP-mail mailing list