Re: [IRCA] ] RIP DX Tests (was: Re: Rackley on Synchronous AM Boosters)

["Paul B. Walker, Jr." <walkerbroadcasting@xxxxxxxxx>]

I no longer have an full time operating AM station at my direct disposal
24/7 or y'all know I'd do a DX test.

Being in the DX Hobby long enough, I can tell when a report is real, even
if no audio clip is included

I did have a DX'er send me a reception report for KIYU-910 from Belgium or
Sweden or something... reporting 4's across the board.. when it wasnt even
on!!

Paul


On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Patrick Martin <mwdxer1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Rick,
>
> Anytime people could always cheat. There were reports from back in the
> 50s with faux reports. I like sending a cassette, reel to reel tape,
> or now CD of what I heard so the CE could tell the reception quality
> as well as it being accurate. But to give up totally on DX Tests
> because of of a faux report or two, it ruins it for the rest of us. I
> love catching the rare stations that could never be heard without a
> test. One issue we are having is the reluctance of station personnel
> to reply to any reports now. Even e mail replies are hard to obtain.
> Even though I get fewer QSLs these days, I still go after them. But DX
> Tests should still be viable in our hobby. We do not get many these
> days as stations do not sign off like they did. I still look forward
> to them when we get them.
>
> Patrick
>
> On 1/6/17, Rick Dau <drummer1965us@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Sorry, DXers of the world, but it's high time that DX tests be done away
> > with....
> >
> >
> >
> > Back in the day, some unscrupulous participants in the hobby made it a
> > practice of waiting about 2-3 weeks after tests were conducted, looking
> > through the pages of DX News, DX Monitor, and other print publications,
> > jotting down the details of what OTHERS were hearing, then sending their
> own
> > faux reports based from those details off to the testing stations.  Very
> > often, engineers would happily mail back QSLs to the offenders, totally
> > unaware of what was going on.  Fortunately, a select few DID get wise to
> the
> > shenanigans being perpetrated and then began conducting tests with the
> > caveat that reports had to be mailed within a scant few days (say,
> within a
> > week or so) after the test, or they would simply not reply to the report.
> > This was, in effect, to curtail the cheating.
> >
> >
> >
> > But with the progress of technology comes a downside.  Through reflectors
> > such as these, along with message boards, DX chatrooms (WHEN they work),
> and
> > other means of instant communication, the cheaters are once again seeing
> the
> > information that others are posting without making their OWN efforts to
> hear
> > the stations.   DX tests were fun while they lasted, but, IMHO, they
> need to
> > be put down.
> >
> >
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Rick Dau
> >
> > South Omaha, Nebraska
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of
> > wghauser@xxxxxxxxx [ABDX] <ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 5:48 PM
> > To: ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [ABDX] Re: Rackley on Synchronous AM Boosters
> >
> >
> >
> > To answer Todd`s question about anyone hearing KKOB Santa Fe, recently
> > in my reports and DXLD:
> >
> > Also, I have repeatedly called for a DX test to be arranged on Santa Fe
> > only, turning off the main Albuquerque transmitter, however briefly
> (without
> > of course, trying to set it up, myself; maybe I would if I still lived in
> > ABQ) And now there is no CPC chairman. Glenn
> >
> > __._,_.___
> > ________________________________
> > Posted by: wghauser@xxxxxxxxx
> > __,_._,___
> >
> _______________________________________________
> The 37th edition of the AM Radio Log is now shipping!
> Info: http://www.nrcdxas.org
>
>
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx