Honus wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Honus wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

snip

You're lucky at the moment, but like all list loggers, someday you'll
really screw
up, they all do. If you've been in the hobby for almost 40 years,
surely
you'd be
aware of that.

Just what exactly is a list logger?

A list logger, in hobby parlance, is one who takes a published
frequency/station list, tunes his radio to said frequency at said time,
and
then says 'I heard station 'xyz' at 2100 on frequency xxx', however, the
individual may have never heard an ID or anything that would actually
indicate
that is indeed station 'xyz'.Their 'logging' is only as reliable (or
unreliable) as the list. Now, the list may or may not be correct, and the
station heard may not actually be the station on the list.

Ah. I thought as much. Is there any way of getting a sure station ID other
than on air identification, or perhaps simultaneous webcasts? (Or the
speaker identifying himself as Brother Stair.) It seems to me that anything
else would fall under the "presumptive" category.

I'm trying to be pretty picky about what I log. I'm doing this with my 9
year old daughter...we stick pins in a map on the wall marking the location
of the transmitters that we're receiving from. It's not as fun if we only
"think" that such and such a program came from such and such a place. I just
don't get why people would even bother list logging; it defeats the whole
purpose, in my view.

I'm a list lager, myself. If I drink too much beer, I tend to tilt to one
side.

One very to way to determine if it is the station in question is to check
parallel frequencies.

Let's say 'xyz' is using 11850 and 15275 at 2100. If the same broadcast is on
both frequencies at that time, it's a pretty good bet that it is indeed 'xyz'
that you are hearing. That still doesn't preclude hearing an ID, but this is a
reliable method.

dxAce