rshapiro@bbn.com (Richard Shapiro) (09/22/89)
In article <776@chyde.uwasa.fi> fk00133r@chyde.uwasa.fi (Jari Perkiomaki FKR) writes:
I feel rec.radio.dx would be a great name for this newsgroup, and
[.....]
Perhaps the term dx with radio may not be self-explanatory, but why
should it be if there is no other concise way of expressing the thing.
However, I think it is a term which is given a certain meaning and which
is generally accepted by the hobbyists.
Right, it's hopeless to try and come up with a succinct name that
would be meaningful to people who don't already know about the hobby.
But maybe 'rec.swl' is a little too succinct. I would go for
rec.broadcast-dx
rec.radio-dx
rec.dx-broadcast
rec.dx-radio
Personal favorite is the first: rec.broadcast-dx. Is this agreeable?
Any of the other three are fine with me as well. I'd like to settle
the naming issue if we can.cook@pinocchio.Encore.COM (Dale C. Cook) (09/22/89)
[rshapiro@BBN.COM (Richard Shapiro) recently posted that: | |Right, it's hopeless to try and come up with a succinct name that |would be meaningful to people who don't already know about the hobby. Agreed! |But maybe 'rec.swl' is a little too succinct. I would go for | | rec.broadcast-dx | rec.radio-dx | rec.dx-broadcast | rec.dx-radio | |Personal favorite is the first: rec.broadcast-dx. Is this agreeable? |Any of the other three are fine with me as well. I'd like to settle |the naming issue if we can. Well, since you asked... I *really* don't like groups with hyphens in them. Swl has been (justifiably) attacked as being only a subset of what's included. How about just rec.dx? Now I know that the term dx is not in general useage, but so what? My experience is that people look at the master files maintained by Spaff when making up their initial .newsrc. So long as the group's purpose is clearly spelled out in the proper place in the list, the curious novice will be able to try us out. Serious DX'ers will have no trouble signing up immediately! Again, I feel embarrassed of my fellow hams. I suspect if someone were to count the house, they would find that swl's greatly outnumber hams worldwide. And, yes, they do NOT need to "grow" into hamdom! - Dale (N1US) Encore Computer Corporation, Marlborough, Mass. INTERNET: cook@encore.com UUCP: {buita || talcott || bellcore} !encore!cook "The more you complain the longer God lets you live."
rshapiro@bbn.com (Richard Shapiro) (09/22/89)
In article <9993@multimax.Encore.COM> cook@encore.com writes: >How about just rec.dx? Before we get too carried away by names with "dx" in them (as opposed to the original "rec.swl"), it's worth remembering that this group would also include articles on shortwave *programs*, even if they come from stations which aren't noteworthy dx "catches". Anybody with any kind of shortwave radio can listen to the BBC -- that would never be called dx'ing. But I would definitely like to see articles about interesting BBC (world service) programs. This is one of the weakest aspects (from an swl point of view) of rec.ham-radio. I take it that we're all agreed on the charter of this proposed group: shortwave programs & schedules, shortwave broadcast-band dx, mw dx, vhf/tv dx, scanners & scanning. It's just the name that's uncertain, correct? I'm beginning to think we should be less fussy about getting the "perfect" name and just pick the one that's the least problematic. Since the charter is mostly about broadcast-band radio & tv, I still like rec.broadcast-dx (the "dx" is there, but not overly emphasized).
s_dowman@leaf.enet.dec.com (Steve Dowman) (09/22/89)
My vote is for rec.radio.dx. It encompasses all the radio bands (MW,LW,SW,VHF,UHF) and that the interest is in dx'ing the radio in general. I personally would like to read what dx signals people are picking up on all the bands. ____________________________________________________________________________ / \ %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % Steve Dowman * Email: s_dowman@leaf.enet.dec.com % % d|i|g|i|t|a|l * -or- s_dowman%leaf.dec@decwrl.dec.com % % Littleton, MA * -or- ...!decwrl!leaf.dec.com!s_dowman % %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
cook@pinocchio.Encore.COM (Dale C. Cook) (09/23/89)
[rshapiro@BBN.COM (Richard Shapiro) recently posted that: | |Before we get too carried away by names with "dx" in them (as opposed |to the original "rec.swl"), it's worth remembering that this group |would also include articles on shortwave *programs*, even if they come |from stations which aren't noteworthy dx "catches". Anybody with any |kind of shortwave radio can listen to the BBC -- that would never be |called dx'ing. But I would definitely like to see articles about |interesting BBC (world service) programs. This is one of the weakest |aspects (from an swl point of view) of rec.ham-radio. | I find this argument so strong I'm now in favor of going back to Richard's original proposal: rec.swl. Can't we all live with that? We can use other means to promote the group (such as an occasional post to rec.ham-radio etc.) - Dale (N1US) Encore Computer Corporation, Marlborough, Mass. INTERNET: cook@encore.com UUCP: {buita || talcott || bellcore} !encore!cook "The more you complain the longer God lets you live."
brian@ucsd.Edu (Brian Kantor) (09/23/89)
If you must have a separate group, call is 'rec.shortwave'.