--
73, Carey, WB4HXE

Pet peeves are bad for your health. I have a pet cat. Her name is Sally. She frequently makes me laugh.

I also try not to have high expectations. That way I am more often pleasantly surprised.

Life rule #1: Don't sweat the small stuff.

Life rule #2: It's ALL small stuff.

Have a nice day.

73

-Jim
NU0C


On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 12:04:41 -0400
careyfisher@... wrote:

Wow, you sure have a lot of pet peeves! Do you have a list of rules people
should use when contacting you?

On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 11:29 AM K8BL BOB LIDDY <k8bl@...> wrote:

Group,

1- It irritates me when someone answers WITHOUT their Grid. So, I then
have to look it up before I log them. Otherwise, the WSJT notification
is defeated that is intended to show a "New Grid". (Yes, I know that
the complex Calls don't show Grids now due to length, etc.)

2 - Another pet peeve is when someone calls while also calling another
Station(s) at the same time. They hop back and forth between us and
it gets chaotic seeing my Call, their Call, some other Calls, etc.
until
we finally complete OUR QSO, if at all, minutes later.

3 - Last pet peeve (for now) is having my CQ answered by a Station on
"my" frequency and having them STAY there and start their own CQ.
(Yes, I know we're on opposite time slots, but it just seems very
rude.)
Meanwhile, there might be someone trying to call ME on that time slot
and will have to fight it out with the group of us!! (Spread out,
please.)

BTW... Happy Fathers' Day to all you OM's.

73, Bob K8BL


On Sunday, June 21, 2020, 08:16:33 AM EDT, Bill Somerville <
g4wjs@...> wrote:


On 21/06/2020 13:10, groups@... wrote:

I had a couple of stations reply to my CQ with Tx 3 last night. Tx 2 is
bad enough but Tx 3 seems bizarre to me.

Does anyone have any idea what they were expecting of me or the reasoning
behind this?

73

Roger
G4HZA

Hi Roger,

that makes no sense. The 'R' is an acknowledgement of receipt of a signal
report. Unless you had a recent partial QSO with them where you did get as
far as sending a signal report to them, you can only respond with an
R+report message and hope that they reply with 'RRR' or 'RR73'.

73
Bill
G4WJS.

--
73, Carey, WB4HXE

On 6/21/2020 10:59 AM, K8BL BOB LIDDY wrote:

But, when I post to a Ham Radio Group, I always include
my Name/Call so everyone knows who I am. That's called
good manners.

Yes, and so are the #2 and #3 issues that Bob raised. They are both bad operating practice and bad manners. I disagree about #1 -- there are (at least) 100,000 QSOs in my log without a grid as part of the exchange. As to keeping track of worked and un-worked on a band -- that's easily done with JTAlert working in conjunction with one of the logging programs it supports. I've used DXKeeper since getting back on the air in 2003, and love it. It interacts well with WSJT-X and JTAlert, with LOTW, eQSL, and ClubLog, and keeps track of many awards. It's FREE. In addition to logging directly from WSJT-X/JTAlert, I export ADIF from N1MM after each contest, and use DXKeeper to upload/download LOTW, eQSL, and ClubLog. DXKeeper is FREEware.

73, Jim K9YC

Bob, read carefully, Carey did include his name and call.

Roger,  technically speaking the 4 components that make a contact a valid QSO are:
Band, Mode, the QSO partner's callsign, and the time of the QSO (Normally in UTC and ARRL uses Start Time).

Report and grid are notably NOT required to have a valid QSO as is no other information.

So, my guess is that the folks that call you with Tx3 are looking for the minimum info required.  If you answer RR73, they come back with a 73 and you have fullfilled the content of the 4 components.

I have gotten Tx3 calls also.  I just let the program respond with RR73 and I get a 73 back and log it.

It's not ideal if you are looking for grids and want WSJT-X to highlight the caller with the appropriate color.  If you upload to LoTW, the and the QSO partner is in LoTW, you will still get credit for that grid.

I always remind people to think of a DX Expedition.  Extremely minimal info to work the most people possible, and nobody complains that they did not get a 73 or a grid.  They are just happy to get that ATNO. 

73.
Carl - WC4H

Ditto on the software combo Jim.  It's all free and it all WORKS.

73.
Carl - WC4H

Now you have got me curious. Why not just work them and move on?

73

-Jim
NU0C


On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 19:03:56 +0000 (UTC)
"K8BL BOB LIDDY" <k8bl@...> wrote:

It seems that the EU folks are the ones that often like to starta QSO by not using TX1 with their Grid. Maybe they feel theycan make QSOs quicker that way. That's not my preference sinceI have WSJTX set up to indicate "New Grid On Band". If theydon't send it, I am forced to look it up in QRZ. I run WSJTXby itself.

To answer Roger's initial question - I've only experienced this with stations "in demand". I call them with Tx1 but somehow get Tx3 back so I log a QSO without me ever sending my report. I guess they are treating data as an expedition type QSO and reports are superfluous? Never had it in answer to my CQ though.

Bob K8BL - I've yet to have a JA station answer my CQ call with anything other than Tx2, it isn't that common a practice in Europe yet.

And while I agree with the comments re software JTAlert does not always (in my experience) provide the locator unless you have already worked the station. Since WSJT highlights the worked before status by using its own Log.ADI file unless you edit that file or enter the Locator before you hit the log QSO button you are left with your peeve!

Does seem to me BTW that there are still way too many that insist on not using split. I thought WSJT was programmed so that if you called on someones frequency but they answered somebody else then your Tx was disabled.

There must be a different program out there that doesn't do this as I watched a Spanish station on 10m the other night that continually called a station on their frequency without any form of watchdog timeout and despite that station somehow managing lots of QSO's with other callers. Now that would peeve me off! 

73's Tony G4NBS

On 6/21/2020 12:03 PM, K8BL BOB LIDDY wrote:

It seems that the EU folks are the ones that often like to start
a QSO by not using TX1 with their Grid. Maybe they feel they
can make QSOs quicker that way.

On 6M, the vast majority of JA stations call with TX2. It's also common for them to switch to another QSO before giving me RR73. I find this somewhere between dumb and inconsiderate. I've got a 9-call living (for 14 years) in NorCal, so if I'm calling a station who doesn't know me on a band where the other guy is likely using a directional antenna, I'll call with TX1 so that he doesn't turn his antenna in the wrong direction. Without that concern, I would nearly always call with TX2.

I disagree with the advice someone offered that TX3 and TX4 was sufficient. A QSO requires one piece of information in addition to the calls, and RR (or R -6) from both sides. If you CALL with TX3, the other station hasn't given you any info to acknowledge, so it's no QSO.

Now, when in Contest mode, the exchange is grid and the CQing station has sent his grid, I see TX3 as an OK response by the calling station, and RR73 by the CQing station as finishing the QSO.

73, Jim K9YC

I guess you just have to consider it a part of the game then. I you were working a contest for example you wouldn't be getting grids during the QSO. Part of the game. Sometimes fun is hard work. Some logging software allows you to fill empty fields from online sources, maybe that could be an option for you.

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 01:41:48 +0000 (UTC)
"K8BL BOB LIDDY" <k8bl@...> wrote:

Jim,
I do work them. But since I want their Grid in the WSJT Log so itwill tell me if I still need that Grid or not I have to look them up inQRZ for their Grid. Then, I have to enter it before I log the QSO which is easier than going back later to edit the Log. I will alwayswork whoever calls me, I just need their Grid for the Log. I haveno add-ons, just WSJTX working alone since I have seen non-stopmessages here about tons of problems with multiple programs tryingto work together. Bare-bones WSJT on WIN7 with 30W to an End-Fed LW has given me over 24K Q's so far. FT8/4 Rocks!!!
73,   Bob  K8BL

On Sunday, June 21, 2020, 04:12:47 PM EDT, Jim Shorney <jshorney@...> wrote:


Now you have got me curious. Why not just work them and move on?

73

-Jim
NU0C


On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 19:03:56 +0000 (UTC)
"K8BL BOB LIDDY" <k8bl@...> wrote:

It seems that the EU folks are the ones that often like to starta QSO by not using TX1 with their Grid. Maybe they feel theycan make QSOs quicker that way. That's not my preference sinceI have WSJTX set up to indicate "New Grid On Band". If theydon't send it, I am forced to look it up in QRZ. I run WSJTXby itself.

On 22/06/2020 04:59, Jim Shorney wrote:

I guess you just have to consider it a part of the game then. I you were working a contest for example you wouldn't be getting grids during the QSO. Part of the game. Sometimes fun is hard work. Some logging software allows you to fill empty fields from online sources, maybe that could be an option for you.

Then it's a game I'm not prepared to play.

There's been lots of comments on this thread.

There might be logging software which will fill in the grid but that doesn't fill the grid in in WSJTX which defeats the colour coding in the Band Activity. Someone even suggest Jtalert which as far as I know is a windows only package.

I know the minimum needed for a QSO but in my opinion common courtesy and consideration towards others also apply particularly regarding the use of 73.

A substantial proportion of QSL cards I receive are from those who didn't send 73, all wanting a card in return, and I don't see why I should bother when they haven't shown even a basic courtesy towards me. I don't bother.

Bypassing the grid stage saves just 15 or 30 seconds during the QSO. Yet stations wanting the grid are expected to look it up, hope it's correct, and manually edit their ADIF file. I just can't be bothered any more. It's easier to avoid having a QSO with them. I do allow a QSO to go ahead with those using a non-standard calls, some even send their grid just before the 73.

Ideally I'd like to see WSJTX modified with a little tick box preventing a response to non-grid replies.

73
Roger
G4HZA

Again, don't sweat the small stuff. It's just a hobby. Lighten up.

And have a look at Gridtracker, it comes in a Linux flavor.

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 10:56:15 +0100
groups@... wrote:

On 22/06/2020 04:59, Jim Shorney wrote:

I guess you just have to consider it a part of the game then. I you were working a contest for example you wouldn't be getting grids during the QSO. Part of the game. Sometimes fun is hard work. Some logging software allows you to fill empty fields from online sources, maybe that could be an option for you.

Then it's a game I'm not prepared to play.

There's been lots of comments on this thread.

There might be logging software which will fill in the grid but that
doesn't fill the grid in in WSJTX which defeats the colour coding in the
Band Activity. Someone even suggest Jtalert which as far as I know is a
windows only package.

I know the minimum needed for a QSO but in my opinion common courtesy
and consideration towards others also apply particularly regarding the
use of 73.

A substantial proportion of QSL cards I receive are from those who
didn't send 73, all wanting a card in return, and I don't see why I
should bother when they haven't shown even a basic courtesy towards me.
I don't bother.

Bypassing the grid stage saves just 15 or 30 seconds during the QSO.
Yet stations wanting the grid are expected to look it up, hope it's
correct, and manually edit their ADIF file. I just can't be bothered
any more. It's easier to avoid having a QSO with them. I do allow a
QSO to go ahead with those using a non-standard calls, some even send
their grid just before the 73.

Ideally I'd like to see WSJTX modified with a little tick box preventing
a response to non-grid replies.

73
Roger
G4HZA

I know about gridtracker but that doesn't solve the problem of updating the WSJTX log.