In article ,
"lsmyer" wrote:

I strongly agree with Mr. Bryant on this. DXing is a very individual
activity. Some people meticulously spend hours on a particular frequency. I
had a friend who was that way. He was incredibly thorough but he never ended
up with many stations.

That doesn't work for me. My attention span is too short to start with. If I
can ID a station in two minutes, then that leaves me a lot more time
available in that window to pull in even more stations.

Plus, there's nothing wrong with using another person's database to make an
ID easier. It's no different than using a digital display on a radio to find
out where you are on the dial. Some purists would rather dx by ear only, and
that's fine too.

Most importantly, though, DXing should be fun.

Well I strongly disagree. If you are going to post that you heard a
certain station on a frequency at some time then you would have to
listen long enough to identify that station. The time to do this could
be just a minute if you happen to tune in at just the right time to
catch an ID but that is not going to happen on a list like the one
presented.

Like I stated, best case, he is ASSUMING the ID of the station based on
SOMEONE ELSE'S HARD WORK that spent the time listening to their radio.

A log list that someone has taken the time to verify (ID) is worth
reading and that's not Bryant's list.

He probably just made the up the list anyway so you want to argue over
nothing?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California