Re: [wsjt-devel] Callsign highlighting

[Alex, VE3NEA]

Hi Bill,

Your latest message aggregator works perfectly, both in the highlight-last and list-based modes. WSJTX now does all that I want, 
in terms of callsign highlighting. I used the new message to highlight the countries not worked this year, and improved my DX 
Marathon score significantly in just one evening. Thank you for your effort!


73 Alex VE3NEA




On 2018-03-27 18:26, Bill Somerville wrote:

On 27/03/2018 04:10, Alex, VE3NEA wrote:
When I was initially experimenting with callsign highlighting, I painted all instances of the call that appeared after the 
last separator. I searched for "" backwards from the end of the text, then searched forward for the callsign, starting at 
that point. This proved to be unnecessary in the Highlight Last mode, but when this mode is off, you may want to use this 
method to ensure that highlighting does not propagate beyond the point of the band change. Of course, this will work only if 
separators are enabled.


Hi Alex,

thanks again fro the feedback.

For the above I think that it is best left for the future when we have a much richer internal model of decodes, things like the 
dial frequency when they were decoded will eventually be stored alongside the decoded text, date, time etc. This will make this 
sort of logic far more practical. I suspect for the vast majority of users there is little care for decodes that have scrolled 
off the top unless they are for the last one or two T/R periods.


I have added a bit more functionality to the message_aggregator reference application to exercise the highlight last instance 
only flag and to allow the selection of foreground and background colours in the "Calls of interest" list. This is only so I can 
test the message functionality fully, there are no WSJT-X implementation changes. Here's a new patch for any who might be 
interested:


https://www.dropbox.com/s/7slm4oypbc5g8ks/highlight.diff?dl=0

I consider this patch a low risk and I am happy to merge it to the development branch even though we are already at RC3, which 
means it will make it into the v1.9.0 GA release. Unless you have any other suggestions on this functionality I will commit the 
changes tomorrow.


73
Bill
G4WJS.


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel




--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

[Mike Besemer]

Like or not, the inconsistency exists.  I'm not the one who set it up that way 
and neither of our opinions really matters anyway; the fact is that 7070 has 
been in use by PSK for over 15 years in Region 2 and there is no reason NOT to 
know that; it is widely published for anyone to see.  If you think I'm pulling 
that fact out of my posterior, feel free to Google it yourself.  

I'm not sure where you get the idea I have a limited world view; I clearly 
stated in several of my emails that things always go to hell in a handbasket 
when rare DX hits the bands.  As for not buying my comment about 7040 being 
mostly EU, that's the way the bandplan has it set up.  Again, Google is your 
friend.  If you're hearing PSK on 7040 during the day in your area, there are 
obviously stations in your area using it; leave it to the left coast to have it 
ass-backwards.  I'm not a no-code tech... I've been doing this for over 40 
years and I don't appreciate you talking down to me.  

I get it... you don’t like PSK-31.  That's fine, but you need not throw stones 
at those of us who do.  If you like FT8 and the wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am type 
of contact, more power to you.  Those of us who care more about the human 
element of ham radio than our DXCC or grid count are fine with that.  All we 
ask is that you leave us the hell alone in our little 2 KHz segment of the band 
and for God's sake be a gentleman and listen before you transmit; anything less 
is nothing less than an indication of a piss-poor operator.   We don't move up 
into your area during our contests... we'd appreciate the same treatment. 

Frankly, those of us on PSK are not going to go around trying to police what 
the DXpeditions are trying to do.  We have no means to do so and they wouldn't 
listen to us anyway.  The developers are the one who let this genie out of the 
bottle and they are damn well responsible for what happens when it is misused.  
They could very easily license Fox mode to individual DXpeditions, requiring 
them to do a little coordination before issuing the license.  No coordination - 
no Fox Mode - period.  And that entire process would be a lot less painful that 
listening to us bitching about you all the time.  

There are over 100 emails on this subject today in the various PSK groups that 
I belong to and the PSK community is pissed.  If you think my tone here is 
ugly, you ought to hear what's being said behind your back.  As far as I can 
tell, NOBODY with any authority to fix this problem has ever piped up about 
what can be done, or even acknowledged that people are complaining.  What I 
keep hearing is 'it ain't illegal for us to be there, so we're gonna be there', 
which once again is the sign of a piss-poor operator and a lousy excuse for a 
human being.  What IS illegal is intentional interference - and a lot of people 
are convinced that that's what's happening.  

I'm done here... I've said my peace and don't expect anyone to listen.  If the 
developers only care about FT8 users, then the rest of us are wasting our 
breath anyway.  If the developers give a damn about what's good for them and 
for ham radio, they'll step in and clean up the mess they made.

WM4B BT CL

-Original Message-
From: Jim Brown [mailto:k...@audiosystemsgroup.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 4:24 PM
To: mwbese...@cox.net
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

On 3/27/2018 3:59 AM, mwbese...@cox.net wrote:
> 7040 is used mostly in Europe.  Region 2 uses 7070 - thus the 
> existence of the 070 Club, of which I've been a member for 15 or more 
> years.

That inconsistency is totally inappropriate on a band that supports worldwide 
QSOs. A comparable disconnect in the voluntary Region One and Region Two 
bandplans occurs on 6M, where summertime openings often support QSOs between NA 
and EU, yet the digital are more than 100 kHz apart. And I don't buy the 7040 
segment "mainly in EU;" I'm near San Francisco, and it's often full of PSK 
during daylight hours that are far too loud to be coming from EU.

I am in complete disagreement with your position and your quite limited "world 
view" of ham operation. Have you never heard a pileup for a DXpedition to a 
rare place? It's common for 10-15 kHz to be wall-to-wall on CW and RTTY, and 
twice that on SSB. And for there to be hundreds of stations calling within one 
of those pileups. Or in a major contest, when participants on any given band 
can outnumber casual operators by more than 200:1? And how are the "brag tapes" 
that turned me and many of my friends off to PSK and RTTY for casual operation 
different from FT8?

 From where I sit, WSJT-X developers have done wonderful things that have 
opened new possibilities for those of us who push the envelope. EU most bands 
is a heavy lift from NorCal, and really tough below 20M. 
Working ANYTHING can be tough for those in antenna-challenged QTHs, and the 
WSJT-X modes open new possibilities for them as well.

It is a LONG 

Re: [wsjt-devel] tx4 RR73 patch

[John Zantek]

Yay!

 

From: Black Michael via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 11:54 AM
To: WSJT Software Development 
Cc: Black Michael 
Subject: [wsjt-devel] tx4 RR73 patch

 

Allow user to shift-double-click TX4 to make RR73 last across band changes.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qav6d92gllu9ktc/tx4.patch?dl=1

 

de Mike W9MDB

 

 

 

 

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

[wsjt-devel] FT8 for 2018 Field Day

[Rich - K1HTV]

FT8 for 2018 Field Day

Regarding the use of FT8 on Field Day, you can do what I did during the recent 
VA QSO Party, that is, use the Tx5 (73) message to send contest data. The VQP 
exchange sent was number, county & State, "nnn CUL VA 73", where 'nnn' was my 
QSO number and 'CUL' was the abbreviation for Culpeper county. The 'VA' for 
Virginia was not a contest exchange  requirement. The Tx5 message met the 13 
character maximum and ended with '73', which trigger the '73' message of the 
station being worked. I created a Tx5 macro message "000 CUL VA 73". When a QSO 
started, I simply pulled down that macro message and manually changed the 000 
to the next number in the sequence.


Unfortunately almost no FT8 stations worked in the VA QSO Party knew how to 
send the required data. As a result I focused mainly on working DX on FT8, 
where the only a number (dB report) was required. 285 of the 287 VA QSO Party 
QSOs were with DX stations.


If a future WSJT-X release could have a check box for ""Lock Tx5 message", that 
would allow the easier use of FT8 in various contests, such as Field Day and 
State QSO parties. Once the 'Lock' box was checked, the user would type in the 
fixed contest exchange text into the Tx5 message box. It would remain there 
until the contest was over and not be overwritten when a new station was being 
worked.


Sponsors would have to explain, in their rules, how to use FT8 in their 
contest. The Field day exchange wouldn't  present any problem. However, those 
State QSO parties that presently requiring sequential QSO number exchanges 
could switch to using the dB report as the numbers exchanged.


73,
Rich - K1HTV


= = =

Jordan Sherer, KN4CRD wrote:

At that very least you can use a free text message for the exchange, Don: 
"KN4CRD 1B GA"

You just won't be able to use auto sequencing when operating FT8 during field 
day.

Best,
Jordan
KN4CRD

On Mar 27, 2018, 7:40 AM -0400, Don Goldston , wrote:
Any chance that an FT8 mode that performs the required exchange of information 
for the 2018 Field Day could be
created?

I know y'all are wrapped up in DXP mode, but thought it was worth asking.

Thanks,--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

[wsjt-devel] Bug in WSJT-X RC3-DXpedition Mode - No UDP transmissions?

[Dr . Alwin Güdesen]

Hi,

... obviously there are no UDP transmissions while being in DXpedition mode as a HOUND. I 
first realized this behavior in RC2 while working TY7C. Same just now happened under RC3 
while working 7Q7EI on 10132KHz.

UDP messages are urgently required for highlighting purposes in user 
applications.
Please fix this bug.
Thanks!

--
With kind regards:
   Alwin/DJ9KG
  TurboLog Communications
 WWW.TURBOLOG.DE
__


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Callsign highlighting

[Bill Somerville]

On 27/03/2018 04:10, Alex, VE3NEA wrote:
When I was initially experimenting with callsign highlighting, I 
painted all instances of the call that appeared after the last 
separator. I searched for "" backwards from the end of the text, 
then searched forward for the callsign, starting at that point. This 
proved to be unnecessary in the Highlight Last mode, but when this 
mode is off, you may want to use this method to ensure that 
highlighting does not propagate beyond the point of the band change. 
Of course, this will work only if separators are enabled.


Hi Alex,

thanks again fro the feedback.

For the above I think that it is best left for the future when we have a 
much richer internal model of decodes, things like the dial frequency 
when they were decoded will eventually be stored alongside the decoded 
text, date, time etc. This will make this sort of logic far more 
practical. I suspect for the vast majority of users there is little care 
for decodes that have scrolled off the top unless they are for the last 
one or two T/R periods.


I have added a bit more functionality to the message_aggregator 
reference application to exercise the highlight last instance only flag 
and to allow the selection of foreground and background colours in the 
"Calls of interest" list. This is only so I can test the message 
functionality fully, there are no WSJT-X implementation changes. Here's 
a new patch for any who might be interested:


https://www.dropbox.com/s/7slm4oypbc5g8ks/highlight.diff?dl=0

I consider this patch a low risk and I am happy to merge it to the 
development branch even though we are already at RC3, which means it 
will make it into the v1.9.0 GA release. Unless you have any other 
suggestions on this functionality I will commit the changes tomorrow.


73
Bill
G4WJS.


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

[wsjt-devel] tx4 RR73 patch

[Black Michael via wsjt-devel]

Allow user to shift-double-click TX4 to make RR73 last across band changes.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qav6d92gllu9ktc/tx4.patch?dl=1
de Mike W9MDB




--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] FT8 for 2018 Field Day

[Don Goldston]

Yeah, that'd even work with the 3 letter location codes as long as didn't
have any modifiers on your callsign.   But when you get up to the 10+
transmitter categories it starts to fail for 6 letter callsigns .  If you
coded it like the maidenhead grid, you could get up to 64 transmitter clubs
inside of 16 bits.

73,
Don KE0G

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Jordan Sherer 
wrote:

> At that very least you can use a free text message for the exchange, Don:
> "KN4CRD 1B GA"
>
> You just won't be able to use auto sequencing when operating FT8 during
> field day.
>
> Best,
> Jordan
> KN4CRD
>
> On Mar 27, 2018, 7:40 AM -0400, Don Goldston ,
> wrote:
>
> Any chance that an FT8 mode that performs the required exchange of
> information for the 2018 Field Day could be created?
>
> I know y'all are wrapped up in DXP mode, but thought it was worth asking.
>
> Thanks,
> Don
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
>
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] FT8 for 2018 Field Day

[Jordan Sherer]

At that very least you can use a free text message for the exchange, Don: 
"KN4CRD 1B GA"

You just won't be able to use auto sequencing when operating FT8 during field 
day.

Best,
Jordan
KN4CRD

On Mar 27, 2018, 7:40 AM -0400, Don Goldston , wrote:
> Any chance that an FT8 mode that performs the required exchange of 
> information for the 2018 Field Day could be created?
>
> I know y'all are wrapped up in DXP mode, but thought it was worth asking.
>
> Thanks,
> Don
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

[Hasan al-Basri]

It doesn't matter how inconvenient it is to code in various region's FT8
"sub band". The DXp mode created the problem, it is already very
complicated code. The further complication of exclusion zones for DXp by
region, is a pittance compared to the initial investment.

Otherwise all we have is the tyranny of the majority, instead of respecting
the legitimate concerns of existing mode users.

*It was a virtual certainty that DXp would be abused*. It's one thing to
not have foreseen this (Law of Unintended Consequences), it is entirely
another to be dismissively indifferent to said consequences (let them eat
cake)

The utter hypocrisy of "NIMBY", is stunning. (Not in MY Back Yard). If DXp
is such a great thing and not disruptive, and only a minor inconvenience
that will "quiet down",  put your money where your mouth is do it
INSIDE the normal FT8 "allocation". Tell me what you think after a few "dx
operations"


Hasan

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:51 AM, Tom Melvin  wrote:

> Not going to work.
>
> Taking 40m as example -  What is the ‘FT8 allocation’ ? - all that could
> be coded would be the MGM allocation - nothing says FT8 needs to be 7.074 -
> UK band plan has digi modes 7.053 - 7.060  and the rest of the 7 Mhz
> allocation is ‘All Modes’.  PSK31 starts from 7.040 - which is actually
> well away from 7.071 that was in use last night.
>
> Yes there are a few 'centre of activities’, may vary slightly by region -
> heck a job to code all those into Dx mode esp the number of bands and
> regions there are these days.
>
> How many ‘proper’ DX piditions will there be? - if you have your favourite
> chat freq on SSB suddenly taken over by an expedition do you throw toys out
> of pram and blame those that introduced SSB - no you realises it will be a
> few days or a week or so and you live with it.
>
> The general usage of the watering holes will quieten down over time - not
> addressing that just the Dx Mode - 100% of the time it will be the
> expedition itself that specifies the frequencies they plan to use - it is
> those people you need to address this issue to.  Remind them there are
> others ‘watering holes’ in the all mode section they should avoid. Perhaps
> there should be a ‘Centre of activity’ on each band for DX operations?
>
> 73’
> Tom
> GM8MJV
>
>
>
>
> On 27 Mar 2018, at 13:15, mwbese...@cox.net wrote:
>
> Hasan,
>
> Thank you for that very eloquent post!  I think your suggestions are
> spot-on and I'd LOVE to see all of them implemented.
>
> 73,
>
> Mike
> WM4B
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Hasan al-Basri wrote:
>
>  I agree with every point that Mike (WM4B) made. DXpedition mode is
> becoming a scourge on the bands w/r to other modes.
>
>
> Another person asked for suggestion instead of complaints.
>
>
> OK, try this on:
>
>
> 1.Disable the mode until *real *precautions are taken to observe the
> current watering holes for other modes.
>
>
> 2. *Recode so that DXp mode can ONLY be run in the normal FT8 band
> space...that way, when these rogue or even legitimate DXp projects come on,
> they will trash the normal FT8 sections *...see how much you like it when
> your favorite operating (and agreed upon) frequencies are trashed by a
> bunch of hysterical dx'ers.
>
>
> Since DXp largely requires CAT mode, it should be straightforward (and
> only responsible on the part of the authors) to code in a requirement to *run
> DXp mode in the current FT8 Allotment.  *
> *They did it for WSPR... *
>
>
> This would be especially fitting since the FT8 authors created this
> monster...the FT8 crowd should be made to live with it.
>
>
> ...and it's easy to dismiss things as "not much of  a crisis" when it's
> someone else's nest that's being fowled.
>
>
> Maybe it's time for the FT8 nest to be fowled. and see how much that is
> appreciated.
>
>
>
> Hasan
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:22 AM, < *mwbese...@cox.net*> wrote:
> Gary,
>
> As I said, I've recently heard some very good conversation here about the
> need to avoid QRM to other modes; that's part of the reason it was so
> disappointing to see 40 meters get trashed last night all the way down to
> 7068 - or perhaps lower.
>
> The reason I address the developers is twofold.  First, I (for one)
> certainly saw the potential for this to happen when DXpedition mode was
> first discussed.  This is the genie they let out of the bottle and I can't
> believe they didn't' foresee the potential consequences.  Second, as
> developers, they should take some responsibility for how their product is
> used - and you'd certainly think they'd want it to be used in a manner that
> would show them and their product in a positive light.
>
> Recent discussion suggested moving towards the underutilized JT
> frequencies, and I think that makes sense.  Aside from low utilization, FT8
> and the JT modes share a father, so I think it's only fair that they live
> together as family.
>
> Nobody is asking for a curtailing of anything except for poor 

Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

[mwbesemer]

Except it's NOT going away.  The DXP fiasco last night was just the 
icing on the cake; the intrusion downward is pretty much ongoing - just 
not to the extent we say last night.


Funny thing is, most DXPeditions do a pretty good job of choosing 
frequencies.  Not sure how it's gotten so mucked up as of late.  I guess 
it's just part of the entire human race starting to circle the drain.


73,
Mike
WM4B


On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:51 AM, Tom Melvin wrote:

"no you realises it will be a few days or a week or so and you live with 
it. "


73’
Tom
GM8MJV




On 27 Mar 2018, at 13:15, mwbese...@cox.net 
 wrote: 



Hasan,

Thank you for that very eloquent post!  I think your suggestions are 
spot-on and I'd LOVE to see all of them implemented.


73,

Mike
WM4B



On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Hasan al-Basri wrote:

  I agree with every point that Mike (WM4B) made. DXpedition mode is 
becoming a scourge on the bands w/r to other modes.


Another person asked for suggestion instead of complaints.

OK, try this on:

1.Disable the mode until real precautions are taken to observe the 
current watering holes for other modes.


2. Recode so that DXp mode can ONLY be run in the normal FT8 band 
space...that way, when these rogue or even legitimate DXp projects come 
on, they will trash the normal FT8 sections ...see how much you like it 
when your favorite operating (and agreed upon) frequencies are trashed 
by a bunch of hysterical dx'ers.


Since DXp largely requires CAT mode, it should be straightforward (and 
only responsible on the part of the authors) to code in a requirement to 
run DXp mode in the current FT8 Allotment.

They did it for WSPR...

This would be especially fitting since the FT8 authors created this 
monster...the FT8 crowd should be made to live with it.


...and it's easy to dismiss things as "not much of  a crisis" when it's 
someone else's nest that's being fowled.


Maybe it's time for the FT8 nest to be fowled. and see how much that is 
appreciated.



Hasan

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:22 AM, < mwbese...@cox.net 
 > 
wrote:

Gary,

As I said, I've recently heard some very good conversation here about 
the need to avoid QRM to other modes; that's part of the reason it was 
so disappointing to see 40 meters get trashed last night all the way 
down to 7068 - or perhaps lower.


The reason I address the developers is twofold.  First, I (for one) 
certainly saw the potential for this to happen when DXpedition mode was 
first discussed.  This is the genie they let out of the bottle and I 
can't believe they didn't' foresee the potential consequences.  Second, 
as developers, they should take some responsibility for how their 
product is used - and you'd certainly think they'd want it to be used in 
a manner that would show them and their product in a positive light.


Recent discussion suggested moving towards the underutilized JT 
frequencies, and I think that makes sense.  Aside from low utilization, 
FT8 and the JT modes share a father, so I think it's only fair that they 
live together as family.


Nobody is asking for a curtailing of anything except for poor operating 
practice.  Many PSK QSOs were QRM'd to the point of making 
communications impossible last night, and I don't believe for a minute 
that the PSK activity was not visible to the FT8 users.  There is no 
excuse for anyone on any mode to spoil the fun of others, and yet it's 
happening daily.  I agree that direction and guidance is needed, but I'm 
not so sure I agree with the ability to self-regulate; we all know that 
the rules go out the window when DX shows up.  If the shoe were on the 
other foot and some other mode were causing interference to your 
mode-of-choice, I have to think you'd be upset too.  I don't know what 
sort of guidance or discussion about being good neighbors is occurring 
on other email reflectors, but I hope there is active discussion about 
the problem.


As I stated in another email, PSK is alive and well and I believe it is 
underreported by PSKReporter, based on observations of my own activity.


With regard to a crisis, all I can tell you is that the PSK community 
is, for lack of a better word, pissed about the intrusion.  For the most 
part, we stick to about 1500 Hz in each band, but every time there is a 
digital contest, everyone creeps down to that segment.  But at least the 
contests were short-lived and predictable.  FT8 shows up with total 
randomness, but alarming regularity.  I supposed in reality there isn't 
a thing we PSKers can do about it and if FT8 wants to march over the top 
of us, you can certainly do it - but I'd really like to think it won't 
come to that.


Despite my negative feelings towards the way the mode is being utilized 
now, I am NOT anti-FT8 (or anti any-mode), but I DO 

Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

[Tom Melvin]

Not going to work.

Taking 40m as example -  What is the ‘FT8 allocation’ ? - all that could be 
coded would be the MGM allocation - nothing says FT8 needs to be 7.074 - UK 
band plan has digi modes 7.053 - 7.060  and the rest of the 7 Mhz allocation is 
‘All Modes’.  PSK31 starts from 7.040 - which is actually well away from 7.071 
that was in use last night.

Yes there are a few 'centre of activities’, may vary slightly by region - heck 
a job to code all those into Dx mode esp the number of bands and regions there 
are these days.

How many ‘proper’ DX piditions will there be? - if you have your favourite chat 
freq on SSB suddenly taken over by an expedition do you throw toys out of pram 
and blame those that introduced SSB - no you realises it will be a few days or 
a week or so and you live with it.

The general usage of the watering holes will quieten down over time - not 
addressing that just the Dx Mode - 100% of the time it will be the expedition 
itself that specifies the frequencies they plan to use - it is those people you 
need to address this issue to.  Remind them there are others ‘watering holes’ 
in the all mode section they should avoid. Perhaps there should be a ‘Centre of 
activity’ on each band for DX operations?

73’
Tom 
GM8MJV




On 27 Mar 2018, at 13:15, mwbese...@cox.net wrote:

> Hasan,
> 
> Thank you for that very eloquent post!  I think your suggestions are spot-on 
> and I'd LOVE to see all of them implemented.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Mike
> WM4B
> 
>  
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Hasan al-Basri wrote:
> 
>  I agree with every point that Mike (WM4B) made. DXpedition mode is becoming 
> a scourge on the bands w/r to other modes. 
> 
> 
> Another person asked for suggestion instead of complaints.
> 
> 
> OK, try this on:
> 
> 
> 1.Disable the mode until real precautions are taken to observe the current 
> watering holes for other modes.
> 
> 
> 2. Recode so that DXp mode can ONLY be run in the normal FT8 band 
> space...that way, when these rogue or even legitimate DXp projects come on, 
> they will trash the normal FT8 sections ...see how much you like it when your 
> favorite operating (and agreed upon) frequencies are trashed by a bunch of 
> hysterical dx'ers.
> 
> 
> Since DXp largely requires CAT mode, it should be straightforward (and only 
> responsible on the part of the authors) to code in a requirement to run DXp 
> mode in the current FT8 Allotment. 
> They did it for WSPR...
> 
> 
> This would be especially fitting since the FT8 authors created this 
> monster...the FT8 crowd should be made to live with it.
> 
> 
> ...and it's easy to dismiss things as "not much of  a crisis" when it's 
> someone else's nest that's being fowled.
> 
> 
> Maybe it's time for the FT8 nest to be fowled. and see how much that is 
> appreciated. 
> 
> 
> 
> Hasan
> 
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:22 AM, < mwbese...@cox.net> wrote:
> Gary,
> 
> As I said, I've recently heard some very good conversation here about the 
> need to avoid QRM to other modes; that's part of the reason it was so 
> disappointing to see 40 meters get trashed last night all the way down to 
> 7068 - or perhaps lower.
> 
> The reason I address the developers is twofold.  First, I (for one) certainly 
> saw the potential for this to happen when DXpedition mode was first 
> discussed.  This is the genie they let out of the bottle and I can't believe 
> they didn't' foresee the potential consequences.  Second, as developers, they 
> should take some responsibility for how their product is used - and you'd 
> certainly think they'd want it to be used in a manner that would show them 
> and their product in a positive light.
> 
> Recent discussion suggested moving towards the underutilized JT frequencies, 
> and I think that makes sense.  Aside from low utilization, FT8 and the JT 
> modes share a father, so I think it's only fair that they live together as 
> family.
> 
> Nobody is asking for a curtailing of anything except for poor operating 
> practice.  Many PSK QSOs were QRM'd to the point of making communications 
> impossible last night, and I don't believe for a minute that the PSK activity 
> was not visible to the FT8 users.  There is no excuse for anyone on any mode 
> to spoil the fun of others, and yet it's happening daily.  I agree that 
> direction and guidance is needed, but I'm not so sure I agree with the 
> ability to self-regulate; we all know that the rules go out the window when 
> DX shows up.  If the shoe were on the other foot and some other mode were 
> causing interference to your mode-of-choice, I have to think you'd be upset 
> too.  I don't know what sort of guidance or discussion about being good 
> neighbors is occurring on other email reflectors, but I hope there is active 
> discussion about the problem.
> 
> As I stated in another email, PSK is alive and well and I believe it is 
> underreported by PSKReporter, based on observations of my own activity.
> 
> With regard to a crisis, 

Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

[Hasan al-Basri]

My suggestions were specifically about the DXp mode, not FT8 in general.

..and it isn't a popularity contest, it's about observing the existing
watering holes.

PSK31 is in use, it will recover somewhat when more people get bored with
"wham bam , thankyou ma'am" operating style.

I enjoy both FT8 and PSK31, it need not be an either/or...but again, I am
only referring to DXp mode at this point, nothing else.

Do DXp INSIDE the current agreed upon FT8 frequencies, and then sort it out
amongst the FT8 users, instead of foisting it on others to live with.


Hasan

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:14 AM, Black Michael via wsjt-devel <
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> Everybody needs to realize a little math here.
>
> In the last 2 hours there were 488 PSK reports showing on pskreporter.
> Compare that to 516,312 FT8 reports.
>
> 516,312/488 = 1058 times more.
>
> Now...let's say the odds of finding a bad actor in all those PSK reports
> is 1-in-488 over that 2 hour period.  Probably a conservative estimate of
> the # of ops who are operating too much power and causing intermod and
> harmonicsthough you may not see them since PSK sensitivity is notably
> less than FT8 plus we're only talking 1 observed problem in 2 hours.
>
> 1-in-488 PSK would mean over 1,000 in FT8 (500 per hour, 8 per minute).
> So the odds of seeing a problem child is greatly enhanced by the simple
> popularity and operating sequence of the mode.
>
> If the ARRL gets 15M, 40M, and 80M opened up to techncians this will only
> get worse.
>
> de Mike W9MDB
>
>
>
>
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

[mwbesemer]

Hasan,

Thank you for that very eloquent post!  I think your suggestions are 
spot-on and I'd LOVE to see all of them implemented.


73,

Mike
WM4B



On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Hasan al-Basri wrote:

 I agree with every point that Mike (WM4B) made. DXpedition mode is 
becoming a scourge on the bands w/r to other modes. 


Another person asked for suggestion instead of complaints.

OK, try this on:

1.Disable the mode until real precautions are taken to observe the 
current watering holes for other modes.


2. Recode so that DXp mode can ONLY be run in the normal FT8 band 
space...that way, when these rogue or even legitimate DXp projects come 
on, they will trash the normal FT8 sections ...see how much you like it 
when your favorite operating (and agreed upon) frequencies are trashed 
by a bunch of hysterical dx'ers.


Since DXp largely requires CAT mode, it should be straightforward (and 
only responsible on the part of the authors) to code in a requirement to 
run DXp mode in the current FT8 Allotment. 

They did it for WSPR...

This would be especially fitting since the FT8 authors created this 
monster...the FT8 crowd should be made to live with it.


...and it's easy to dismiss things as "not much of  a crisis" when it's 
someone else's nest that's being fowled.


Maybe it's time for the FT8 nest to be fowled. and see how much that is 
appreciated. 



Hasan

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:22 AM, < mwbese...@cox.net 
 > 
wrote:

Gary,

As I said, I've recently heard some very good conversation here about 
the need to avoid QRM to other modes; that's part of the reason it was 
so disappointing to see 40 meters get trashed last night all the way 
down to 7068 - or perhaps lower.


The reason I address the developers is twofold.  First, I (for one) 
certainly saw the potential for this to happen when DXpedition mode was 
first discussed.  This is the genie they let out of the bottle and I 
can't believe they didn't' foresee the potential consequences.  Second, 
as developers, they should take some responsibility for how their 
product is used - and you'd certainly think they'd want it to be used in 
a manner that would show them and their product in a positive light.


Recent discussion suggested moving towards the underutilized JT 
frequencies, and I think that makes sense.  Aside from low utilization, 
FT8 and the JT modes share a father, so I think it's only fair that they 
live together as family.


Nobody is asking for a curtailing of anything except for poor operating 
practice.  Many PSK QSOs were QRM'd to the point of making 
communications impossible last night, and I don't believe for a minute 
that the PSK activity was not visible to the FT8 users.  There is no 
excuse for anyone on any mode to spoil the fun of others, and yet it's 
happening daily.  I agree that direction and guidance is needed, but I'm 
not so sure I agree with the ability to self-regulate; we all know that 
the rules go out the window when DX shows up.  If the shoe were on the 
other foot and some other mode were causing interference to your 
mode-of-choice, I have to think you'd be upset too.  I don't know what 
sort of guidance or discussion about being good neighbors is occurring 
on other email reflectors, but I hope there is active discussion about 
the problem.


As I stated in another email, PSK is alive and well and I believe it is 
underreported by PSKReporter, based on observations of my own activity.


With regard to a crisis, all I can tell you is that the PSK community 
is, for lack of a better word, pissed about the intrusion.  For the most 
part, we stick to about 1500 Hz in each band, but every time there is a 
digital contest, everyone creeps down to that segment.  But at least the 
contests were short-lived and predictable.  FT8 shows up with total 
randomness, but alarming regularity.  I supposed in reality there isn't 
a thing we PSKers can do about it and if FT8 wants to march over the top 
of us, you can certainly do it - but I'd really like to think it won't 
come to that.


Despite my negative feelings towards the way the mode is being utilized 
now, I am NOT anti-FT8 (or anti any-mode), but I DO believe that what 
we're seeing now is extremely poor operating practice and it needs to be 
reigned in.  Now, I'm going to fade back into the noise and see what the 
bands look like this evening after 2200 or so with great hope that 
sanity and civility have been restored.


73,

Mike
WM4B


On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:55 AM, g...@isect.com 
 wrote:


I don’t think it’s fair to blame the developers, Mike, or ask them to 
resolve this – at least, not without help from the wider ham community.  
They gave us the mode but we are the users – the tools are in our hands 
now so we’re all part of this.


Do you or anyone else have any specific or even general suggestions on 
how to 

Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

[Black Michael via wsjt-devel]

Everybody needs to realize a little math here.
In the last 2 hours there were 488 PSK reports showing on pskreporter.Compare 
that to 516,312 FT8 reports. 
516,312/488 = 1058 times more.
Now...let's say the odds of finding a bad actor in all those PSK reports is 
1-in-488 over that 2 hour period.  Probably a conservative estimate of the # of 
ops who are operating too much power and causing intermod and 
harmonicsthough you may not see them since PSK sensitivity is notably less 
than FT8 plus we're only talking 1 observed problem in 2 hours.

1-in-488 PSK would mean over 1,000 in FT8 (500 per hour, 8 per minute).  So the 
odds of seeing a problem child is greatly enhanced by the simple popularity and 
operating sequence of the mode.
If the ARRL gets 15M, 40M, and 80M opened up to techncians this will only get 
worse.
de Mike W9MDB



--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

[Hasan al-Basri]

I agree with every point that Mike (WM4B) made. DXpedition mode is becoming
a scourge on the bands w/r to other modes.

Another person asked for suggestion instead of complaints.

OK, try this on:

1.Disable the mode until *real* precautions are taken to observe the
current watering holes for other modes.

2. *Recode so that DXp mode can ONLY be run in the normal FT8 band
space...that way, when these rogue or even legitimate DXp projects come on,
they will trash the normal FT8 sections*...see how much you like it when
your favorite operating (and agreed upon) frequencies are trashed by a
bunch of hysterical dx'ers.

Since DXp largely requires CAT mode, it should be straightforward (and only
responsible on the part of the authors) to code in a requirement to *run
DXp mode in the current FT8 Allotment. *
*They did it for WSPR...*

This would be especially fitting since the FT8 authors created this
monster...the FT8 crowd should be made to live with it.

...and it's easy to dismiss things as "not much of  a crisis" when it's
someone else's nest that's being fowled.

Maybe it's time for the FT8 nest to be fowled. and see how much that is
appreciated.


Hasan

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:22 AM,  wrote:

> Gary,
>
> As I said, I've recently heard some very good conversation here about the
> need to avoid QRM to other modes; that's part of the reason it was so
> disappointing to see 40 meters get trashed last night all the way down to
> 7068 - or perhaps lower.
>
> The reason I address the developers is twofold.  First, I (for one)
> certainly saw the potential for this to happen when DXpedition mode was
> first discussed.  This is the genie they let out of the bottle and I can't
> believe they didn't' foresee the potential consequences.  Second, as
> developers, they should take some responsibility for how their product is
> used - and you'd certainly think they'd want it to be used in a manner that
> would show them and their product in a positive light.
>
> Recent discussion suggested moving towards the underutilized JT
> frequencies, and I think that makes sense.  Aside from low utilization, FT8
> and the JT modes share a father, so I think it's only fair that they live
> together as family.
>
> Nobody is asking for a curtailing of anything except for poor operating
> practice.  Many PSK QSOs were QRM'd to the point of making communications
> impossible last night, and I don't believe for a minute that the PSK
> activity was not visible to the FT8 users.  There is no excuse for anyone
> on any mode to spoil the fun of others, and yet it's happening daily.  I
> agree that direction and guidance is needed, but I'm not so sure I agree
> with the ability to self-regulate; we all know that the rules go out the
> window when DX shows up.  If the shoe were on the other foot and some other
> mode were causing interference to your mode-of-choice, I have to think
> you'd be upset too.  I don't know what sort of guidance or discussion about
> being good neighbors is occurring on other email reflectors, but I hope
> there is active discussion about the problem.
>
> As I stated in another email, PSK is alive and well and I believe it is
> underreported by PSKReporter, based on observations of my own activity.
>
> With regard to a crisis, all I can tell you is that the PSK community is,
> for lack of a better word, pissed about the intrusion.  For the most part,
> we stick to about 1500 Hz in each band, but every time there is a digital
> contest, everyone creeps down to that segment.  But at least the contests
> were short-lived and predictable.  FT8 shows up with total randomness, but
> alarming regularity.  I supposed in reality there isn't a thing we PSKers
> can do about it and if FT8 wants to march over the top of us, you can
> certainly do it - but I'd really like to think it won't come to that.
>
> Despite my negative feelings towards the way the mode is being utilized
> now, I am NOT anti-FT8 (or anti any-mode), but I DO believe that what we're
> seeing now is extremely poor operating practice and it needs to be reigned
> in.  Now, I'm going to fade back into the noise and see what the bands look
> like this evening after 2200 or so with great hope that sanity and civility
> have been restored.
>
> 73,
>
> Mike
> WM4B
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:55 AM, g...@isect.com wrote:
>
> I don’t think it’s fair to blame the developers, Mike, or ask them to
>> resolve this – at least, not without help from the wider ham community.
>> They gave us the mode but we are the users – the tools are in our hands now
>> so we’re all part of this.
>>
>> Do you or anyone else have any specific or even general suggestions on
>> how to take this forward?  What are we hoping to achieve or avoid? What are
>> our priorities and timescales?
>>
>> Despite the emotive words, I am still not convinced there is a crisis
>> right now, nor is there necessarily one brewing.  I would be very reluctant
>> to curtail the 

[wsjt-devel] FT8 for 2018 Field Day

[Don Goldston]

Any chance that an FT8 mode that performs the required exchange of
information for the 2018 Field Day could be created?

I know y'all are wrapped up in DXP mode, but thought it was worth asking.

Thanks,
Don
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?

[mwbesemer]

Gary,

As I said, I've recently heard some very good conversation here about 
the need to avoid QRM to other modes; that's part of the reason it was 
so disappointing to see 40 meters get trashed last night all the way 
down to 7068 - or perhaps lower.


The reason I address the developers is twofold.  First, I (for one) 
certainly saw the potential for this to happen when DXpedition mode was 
first discussed.  This is the genie they let out of the bottle and I 
can't believe they didn't' foresee the potential consequences.  Second, 
as developers, they should take some responsibility for how their 
product is used - and you'd certainly think they'd want it to be used in 
a manner that would show them and their product in a positive light.


Recent discussion suggested moving towards the underutilized JT 
frequencies, and I think that makes sense.  Aside from low utilization, 
FT8 and the JT modes share a father, so I think it's only fair that they 
live together as family.


Nobody is asking for a curtailing of anything except for poor operating 
practice.  Many PSK QSOs were QRM'd to the point of making 
communications impossible last night, and I don't believe for a minute 
that the PSK activity was not visible to the FT8 users.  There is no 
excuse for anyone on any mode to spoil the fun of others, and yet it's 
happening daily.  I agree that direction and guidance is needed, but I'm 
not so sure I agree with the ability to self-regulate; we all know that 
the rules go out the window when DX shows up.  If the shoe were on the 
other foot and some other mode were causing interference to your 
mode-of-choice, I have to think you'd be upset too.  I don't know what 
sort of guidance or discussion about being good neighbors is occurring 
on other email reflectors, but I hope there is active discussion about 
the problem.


As I stated in another email, PSK is alive and well and I believe it is 
underreported by PSKReporter, based on observations of my own activity.


With regard to a crisis, all I can tell you is that the PSK community 
is, for lack of a better word, pissed about the intrusion.  For the most 
part, we stick to about 1500 Hz in each band, but every time there is a 
digital contest, everyone creeps down to that segment.  But at least the 
contests were short-lived and predictable.  FT8 shows up with total 
randomness, but alarming regularity.  I supposed in reality there isn't 
a thing we PSKers can do about it and if FT8 wants to march over the top 
of us, you can certainly do it - but I'd really like to think it won't 
come to that.


Despite my negative feelings towards the way the mode is being utilized 
now, I am NOT anti-FT8 (or anti any-mode), but I DO believe that what 
we're seeing now is extremely poor operating practice and it needs to be 
reigned in.  Now, I'm going to fade back into the noise and see what the 
bands look like this evening after 2200 or so with great hope that 
sanity and civility have been restored.


73,

Mike
WM4B




On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:55 AM, g...@isect.com wrote:

I don’t think it’s fair to blame the developers, Mike, or ask them to 
resolve this – at least, not without help from the wider ham 
community.  They gave us the mode but we are the users – the tools are 
in our hands now so we’re all part of this.


Do you or anyone else have any specific or even general suggestions on 
how to take this forward?  What are we hoping to achieve or avoid? 
What are our priorities and timescales?


Despite the emotive words, I am still not convinced there is a crisis 
right now, nor is there necessarily one brewing.  I would be very 
reluctant to curtail the creativity and innovation that has clearly 
sparked the imaginations of a majority of active HF DXers.  I’m not 
arguing for total anarchy, just some restraint over how we set and 
adjust the rules of the game, and recognition that the situation is 
evolving.  With a bit of direction and guidance maybe, I believe we 
have the capacity, as a community, to self-regulate and reach a 
pragmatic consensus, just as we have done in the past.


73,

Gary  ZL2iFB



From: Mike Besemer  Sent: Tuesday, 27 March 2018 
1:59 p.m.

To: 'WSJT software development' 
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?


Yeah… saw those ground loops too.  But I’ve seen them on PSK and other 
data modes, so I didn’t mention it; it’s not the fault of the mode.



So… developers… how do you put the genie back in the bottle?  There is 
some serious bad blood brewing.



Mike

WM4B


From: James Shaver [mailto:n2...@windstream.net] Sent: Monday, March 
26, 2018 8:54 PM

To: 'WSJT software development'
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode on 40 Meters?


It’s more than 7.071 and up – there’s some folks in there with wicked 
ground-loop hum and they’re causing issues all the way down to 7.067. 
To add to that, some folks saw the activity and have started calling 
CQ