The original poster sed that the DX packet Clusters were a contributing
cause of the mess on the bands.

I replied au contraire as it gives lots of info that should reduce the
chaos.

What the clusters have done is make DX activity known world wide in a very
short period of time. Instant DX huh ?
Many perceive this as a mess where in fact without the clusters, the pileup
would probably build eventually to the same "mess"
So the pileups are bigger quicker. That is a fact of DXing today and it
ain't gonna change -- get over it and use your skills to get thru the
pileup.

In what way has the clusters caused sloppiness?
Good grief -- it gives the freq, split, callsign, QSL mgr, District or
country currently being worked, QSX spots, etc.
I suspect many who would ask "Who's the DX" "Who's the manager" "Where is
he/she listening"; no longer do that as it is readily available on the
clusters VHF or telnet.

Thus anyone using the cluster shouldn't have to ask these questions on top
of the DX freq.

No not all use the clusters, of course. No one sed they did or that it was a
requirement.

Whether one should use the clusters or whether they should even exist is an
entirely different matter.
Many will say they have 3 jobs, 8 kids and a demanding wife and don't have
the time to tune for 8 hours.
So be it.
I like to tune and find them myself but I have the time and inclination to
do that.
Personally I prefer the old days when one had to tune tune tune to find DX,
but that ain't the way it is any more.

As for "If on occasion, the DX would say, this is P5A, listening up 5 for
W7s
only, there would be a lot less chaos."
That's the DX station's fault not the callers or the cluster -- in fact the
cluster is quite useful when the DX is sloppy.

As for the DX asking for a cluster post -- of course he/she wants the
maximum number of contacts -- seems like a reasonable request to me. Are you
going to help them do that or decline ?

Bottom line DX Packet Clusters are here to stay -- like em or not.

--
CV - I doubt, therefore I might be !






"Wes Stewart" *n7ws*@ yahoo.com wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:26:47 -0800, "Caveat Lector"
wrote:

[snip]

| Indeed, while I hate to join the "I hate packet" bandwagon there really
| does seem to be a correlation between continuous calling and the
explosive
| growth of spotting nets.
|
|The spotting nets give a lot of info that was not available in the old
|days -- working country X only, working district X only, Up x to x freq,
|wrked em at XXX, QSX X , QSY to Band X, DX station is QRT, etc.
|
|So for the intelligent DXer this should bring more order out of chaos.
But
|alas it seems to have helped very little -- so perhaps it is not the
|cluster hounds who are the problem as evidenced with the unbelievable
"Who's
|the Dx" queries. Obviously these guys aren't looking at the cluster. Nor
is
|the lid who is calling on the DX frequency -- one look at the packet
cluster
|would reveal that --provided the lid knows what "he is working split"
means.

I will admit to occasionally looking at worldwide Internet spots on
the computer in a room away from the ham shack. I do this mainly to
get a feel for what the propagation is around the globe. But I don't
have a filtered packet cluster tuning my radio for me or have voice
announcements calling me away from other things to work DX.

I don't have a problem with those who want to operate this way, I just
choose not to. That said, I do believe that clusters have caused a
certain sloppiness to creep into current DX practice.

For example, I have on occasion been the first to work some DX station
and have had him ask me to spot him. I have to decline, since I
wouldn't know how to do it if I wanted to. Why the guy can't just
keep calling CQ until he makes his own pileup escapes me.

But when he gets spotted and the pile is in place, he figures he
doesn't have to identify anymore, so guys like me that tune across the
pileup wonder who in the hell he is. I know better than to ask, but
some don't, hence the "Who's the DX?" questions. The assumption that
*everyone* is connected to a cluster is ridiculous. When did it
become a requirement that to work DX you had to have a packet cluster
connection?

If on occasion, the DX would say, this is P5A, listening up 5 for W7s
only, there would be a lot less chaos.