Dick — Your observations below are quite different from what I have observed myself and also received recommendations about from constituents back here. There are certainly legitimate differences of opinion, and at least two sides to every issue, but during the campaign and even now there has been much gnashing of teeth by cw traffic handlers and net managers whose 80-m traffic nets have been increasingly QRMed over the past few years because digital stations that don’t listen before transmitting have continued to slide down below their previously publicized segments. Section Nets (including VN, the Virginia CW Net), Region Nets, and Eastern Area Net of NTS have all chosen to move lower on 80 — some more than once! — to escape the creeping “blind” digital transmit-without-listening problem. Those who DX but don’t handle traffic and don’t operate contests above 3550 or so aren’t likely to experience the problems … yet. And when I attended a PVRC chapter meeting earlier this month, the first questions I was asked were a prelude to more than one attendee verbalizing concerns about wideband digital signals appearing in the cw segments depending on what FCC decides. Bud, W2RU
On Apr 18, 2019, at 7:01 AM, Richard J. Norton <richardjnorton@gmail.com> wrote:
Summary - In My Opinion:
Digital message handling is not a significant interference problem. There is little or no support of N9NB's proclamations of impending doom from what should be a group of supporters, his fellow contesters.