David, As I suspected you are a casual user, hence why you are not able to comprehend the benefits. For Comparison, since you brought it up..Many weeks I was doing 1500 + Q's in FT-8 only last year during the grid chase. I was on the FT-4 Alpha Test Team and I won First Place World in the last FT Roundup. Now that we got the dick measuring out of the way, please try to understand that there many different types of users and features that would be of great benefit to some may be useless to others. Your continued attempt to belittle people because YOU don't see a use in something has run it's course. Much the same as you stated Over and Over in respect to Call First, if we can get this much needed and much wanted feature, you do NOT have to use it. It will have Zero effect on you. Have a great evening OM. Ron, WV4P
PS Maybe spend your time Uploading to LOTW so people can get credit for the 2000 Q's you have made, I'm sure they would appreciate it and it would have more benefit than lobbying against something that does not effect you. On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 16:36, David Gilbert <[email protected]> wrote: > > Not so. Any of it. > > I've made over 2,000 FT8/FT4 contacts (over 130 countries) in about three > months time and the only ones that weren't DX were the ones that called > me. I tail end DX stations for many of my contacts, but when I call CQ DX > I have zero problem ignoring the persistent stateside stations that often > call me. > > Those unwanted stations calling you aren't "QRM'ing" your ability to > receive either. That is simply in your imagination. And if they are > calling you on your transmit frequency they aren't very smart anyway, and > you blocking them from showing up in the Activity window isn't going to do > a thing to keep them from transmitting there. How can you not understand > that? Most of the more experienced stations, like the ones likely to be > in a contest, are going to lock their transmit frequency and won't be on > the same frequency. > > I'm not telling you not to use "Call 1st". I'm only saying that your > insistence on doing so is the root of your imaginary problem, not the fact > that there isn't the capability in the software to blacklist a callsign. I > guarantee that I can make more QSOs in a given period of time by not > spending time blacklisting callsigns that are more easily ignored. > > There is no wild tangent here. I'm simply directly responding to a > proposal you've made that makes no sense, and you've been using arguments > that don't make technical sense either. > > Dave AB7E > > > On 12/3/2019 11:54 AM, Ron WV4P wrote: > > Dave, with all due respect, maybe you need to read the thread again... You > are going off on wild tangents in your attempt to discredit and trash talk > every operator you can. > The Reason this is needed is to block Lids from tripping Call First, and > or to prevent them from calling you at all. Maybe a casual user will never > experience these issues, as I suspect you are. More advanced users, > especially those contesting or primarily interested in DX need a way to > filter calls. As more and more people with different experience and IQ > levels use the FT Modes the problems get worse and worse. When using a > Directional CQ and the same users over and over QRM you, a way to deal with > that should be present. They are taking away from your time and enjoyment. > If I want to call CQ on the Greyline to Asia I should have that right... > But I will, 100% of the time be QRM'd by USA callers answering my > Directional CQ. Both in Contesting and Directional CQ's "Call First" is a > very important tool that stacks the odds in your favor of completing a > QSO... If you choose not to use it, that's your prerogative, but, Please, > do not tell me not to use it, nor what features could also make the > experience better. Ron, WV4P > > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 12:37, David Gilbert <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> The point is that you said you needed a block to prevent the impact of an >> unwanted caller on your receiver. You just made that up. >> >> The program was designed to require you to actually be an operator, which >> is why you have to enable each QSO instead of it being fully robotic. >> "Call 1st" is merely a crutch for those of us who may not have the reflexes >> to select a new caller within the first 2 seconds of the next frame. I >> sincerely doubt its primary purpose was to remove all thought process from >> making QSOs. >> >> In order to achieve such significant weak signal performance certain >> rigid operating constraints are inherently necessary. The requirement for >> locked time windows, predetermined message format, and fixed coding schemes >> are there to facilitate the weak signal result. In order to mitigate that >> rigidity certain "automation" features exist in the application ... such as >> "Call 1st", "odd/even", and having TX Enable locked to the beginning of a >> time frame. I'm pretty sure they weren't put there to remove the need for >> functioning brain cells. >> >> Dave AB7E >> >> >> On 12/3/2019 10:15 AM, Ron WV4P wrote: >> >> If he's not tripping my Call First so I can use the program as it was >> designed, I don't give a damn what he's doing... Ron, WV4P >> >> On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 10:51, Gary McDuffie <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> > On Dec 2, 2019, at 19:57, Carey Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> > That's ridiculous. A "block" wouldn't keep a station from >>> transmitting, just from being displayed. Can't you just ignore it? >>> >>> Exactly. Blocking your program from showing him won’t do a thing about >>> the way his signal affects your receiver or how much spectrum is being >>> used. It only keeps you from seeing him. >>> >>> Gary - AG0N >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> wsjt-devel mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> wsjt-devel mailing >> [email protected]https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> wsjt-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >> > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing > [email protected]https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
