Moderator: I'm not engaging in busy detection further. I do want to address a key point about perceived QRM that many forget
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave AA6YQ" <aa...@...> wrote: > ### I was not measuring the fraction of QSOs QRMed by a particular PMBO; I > was measuring the number QSOs QRMed by a particular PMBO within a particular > time interval. This is a valid measurement, devoid of selection bias. Many, many perceived QRM cases in reports like this have no validation that the station was actually QRM'd. IE: Just because you could hear a PMBO fire up at the same time as a CW QSO does *not* automatically mean it was QRM'd. It is very likely that you were "man in the middle". Neither PMBO or CW station could hear each other, but you could hear both. I'm not saying that unintentional interference never occurs, but that most reports like this suffer from selection bias (don't report the cases interference did not occur, your's still has selection bias), nor are the automatically examples of interference. I'm sure the answer will come that you could copy the stations complaining about CW, etc. But unless you confirmed the stations actually felt they were QRM'd off the frequency, it's misleading at best. Virtually none of the "I've seen hundreds of QRM examples" anecdotes meet this test. Have fun, signing off of this interchange Alan km4ba
