RBNgate - friend or foe?

Online Resources
1

RBNgate has now been running for quite a while, and it seems that it has had a significant effect on the habits and behaviour of many SOTA operators. Whether that effect is purely beneficial is open to some doubt. My view is that, whilst it can be a valuable asset to an activator when used wisely, it can be a major hindrance to chasers.

As a CW activator I find it extremely useful that, for unalerted activations, I need only send one self-spot to SOTAwatch to ensure that any subsequent frequency changes are captured and promulgated to the waiting chasers. I only need to send further self-spots if I move to bands where RBN coverage is minimal or absent, or in the unlikely event that I decide to use some relatively-obscure mode like Olivia or SSB.

However, as a chaser, I find the effects of RBNgate to be extremely annoying. Of course, it’s not the actual process that annoys me - more the poor standard of operating that its followers display.

A typical example happened a few minutes ago. I was monitoring a frequency on the 30m band whilst working in the shack. I heard a weak CQ and just managed to decipher the callsign. When I called, the other station took several attempts to correctly copy my callsign, presumably as a result of an equally weak signal. After a couple of minutes he started to send my report and the content of the QSO (at this stage I wasn’t even sure if it was a SOTA station), but he was drowned out by at least half-a-dozen well-known SOTA chasers calling blindly on top. Of course I couldn’t complete the QSO, so I looked and, sure enough, RBNgate had caught his CQ and it had filtered through to SOTAwatch after matching a posted alert.

It is not the fault of the activator, nor of RBNgate itself. The problem is solely down to a significant number of SOTA chasers who feel that need for a QSO, whether real or imagined, absolves them from behaving in a socially-
acceptable manner. It used to be the sole preserve of “Top DXers” to display such bad habits in response to cluster spots; now it is becoming the norm on SOTA too.

As with cluster, RBNgate can never be un-invented. What we need is a period of reflection and discussion as to what is and what is not acceptable behaviour within the SOTA diaspora. As standards drop people will vote with their feet, or in our case their tuning dial, and SOTA will become the poorer for it.

Thoughts anybody?

73 de Les, G3VQO

2

In reply to G3VQO:
.
There’s another plus for RBNgate that I’ve not seen mentioned before, Les. I like to see the CW speed of the activating station to further confirm that what I’m hearing is actually him/her.

Elliott, K6EL
All Hat,
No Cattle

3

You’re probably right Les. While not having consciously “voted with my feet”, I rarely bother to call into spotted SOTA activations on HF from home, whereas I do make more of an effort for VHF stations. Having said that, I still try and get all the 12m activations S2S if I am also activating at that time.

While the on-air antics of a few are selfish, aggressive and really rather grating, I see this as an inevitability of a successful global programme rather than anything that can easily be solved.

The chasers in question will not mend their ways. However, us activators can simply put to the back of the queue, or even plain ignore those that wilfully ignore the activator-dictated operating style. And I tend to make a little note in my logbook of those that are “working” me when they clearly can’t hear me. It’s easy to see this behaviour - if in doubt I ask them a question instead of sending a report, and when they say “TU 73”, they do not get logged. They do, however, get an email advising that there was no QSO when I get home! The excuses that come back in reply are “entertaining”!

Tom M1EYP

4

RBNgate does often produce spots more quickly than live chasers would manage, and spots are the trigger, but it’s the aggressive selfish few who are the foe, and not just on CW. I guess their anti-social activities might be curtailed if they could somehow be prevented from seeing spots…

73, Rick M0LEP

5

In reply to M0LEP:

it’s the aggressive selfish few who are the foe, and not just on CW.

Absolutely,
This has nothing to do with RBNgate.
The same scenario would have occurred had it been a human spotter.

73
Pete

6

In reply to G4ISJ:

There’s food for thought in what’s been written. It’s not the technology that is to blame but inconsiderate operators.

Rude, selfish and aggressive is how some are best described. My colleagues on the MT have received complaints about a few. There are some calls which keep occurring and some of these guys have received emails pointing out their poor operating. A few have received strongly worded emails have stopped their bad ways. Others are slowly building up enough blacks marks before we act. Making the calls public or banning from using the database are extreme measures we will use for the worst offenders. The problem is defining the line between being keenly competitive and being selfishly inconsiderate.

I feel somewhat responsible for making the situation worse for providing some of the means for generating instant pileups. But, much as though we may all agree that the world would be better without nuclear weapons, they exist and can’t be uninvented. Likewise spotting systems. It will get worse in a some eyes as I have an ersatz DX Cluster for SOTA spots on alpha test. There will be some who will see the spot, click and call. Sometime later they may listen :frowning:

If I know it will cause problems why make the software available? Simply because if I do it, I have some degree of control over who or what is spotted, spot throughput, filtering people who don’t want to be spotted etc. If someone else does it then that control may not be present. Either way it will come as sure as night follows day.

The fact remains, it’s bad operation that causes the problem. Like many others, I have a “bad boy” list and that does affect how quickly these people get to the front of the queue of chasers I work. What I will now do is start emailing these bad boys in a personal not MT capacity and explain why their operating style is causing issues. Some will change, those that don’t, may get forced into changing.

Andy
MM0FMF

7

In reply to G3VQO:

The problem is solely down to a significant number of SOTA chasers who feel that need for a QSO, whether real or imagined, absolves them from behaving in a socially-acceptable manner. It used to be the sole preserve of “Top DXers” to display such bad habits in response to cluster spots; now it is becoming the norm on SOTA too.

I totally agree Les. The situation has deteriorated considerably in recent weeks. My opinion is that the level of unacceptable behaviour is proportionate to the number of activations. With so many activations taking place, particularly around the middle of the day, there appears to be a temptation for some chasers to dash from band to band in an attempt try to work every activation that is on.

If a more relaxed attitude was taken, then it would be much easier for everyone. As a casual chaser I find it easy to operate that way, but some seem to have become over-addicted to chasing. They act like bad drivers that feel they have to be in front and have no regard for everyone else.

73, Gerald G4OIG

8

In reply to G3VQO:
Hi Les,

RBN for me is on the xmas card list, very handy because as soon as I start to send on CW… spotted, lovely.

Steve MW0BBU.

9

In reply to G3VQO:

Thoughts anybody?

Band hopping might help. For example if the 30 m becomes too noisy QSY to 17 m or 20 m. I am sure the QRM will go down if you move to high enough frequency. Then you can also work split (different TX and RX frequency) and not all the chasers are calling on the same frequency. And you can simply ignore those who stay on the activator TX frequency.

73, Jaakko OH7BF/F5VGL

10

I sometime wish we would have a text string when put in the body of an alert causes the spots to apear either 5 min delayed or spoting only the band, not the exact frequency…

Your thoughts?

Apart from this crazy idea I find myself more and more on the higher bands (like 15 or 12m) where the situaiton is never as bad as on 40m.

73 Heinz

11

In reply to MM0FMF:

I have an ersatz DX Cluster for SOTA spots on alpha test.

The day that comes on line, I am finished with SOTA.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

12

In reply to OE5EEP:

I sometime wish we would have a text string when put in the body of an
alert causes the spots to apear either 5 min delayed or spoting only
the band, not the exact frequency…

Your thoughts?

I quite agree, Heinz. It has been said that RBNgate is not the problem … “it is the behaviour of the chasers who respond to the spots”. However, RBNgate is the catalyst which has given rise to this bad behaviour. A SOTA DX cluster will make things even worse. The automation of spotting removes the last vestige of skill involved in finding and identifying an activating station. It is a crutch for the lazy, inept operator who would previously not have bothered with SOTA, because it was all too difficult for them without the aid of a mechanised spot.

What will we have next? List controllers? Repeaters? We are in danger of destroying what was once a unique and gentlemanly branch of our hobby.

As I have mentioned before, RBNgate has also given rise to a lot of confusion by generating spots with the wrong summit reference.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

13

In reply to G3NYY:

What will we have next? List controllers? Repeaters? We are in
danger of destroying what was once a unique and gentlemanly branch of
our hobby.

That is only for CW or does the RBN work with SSB or digi too? In the past one or two of my activations failed because I could not get enough QSOs. In that case the RBN can help. From the activator point of view it is also better if you do not need to stay too long on the summit. Yes there are some gentlemen and good CW operators in UK who will spot you on SOTA watch if there is no spot already. I try to do the same if I have the possibility.

73, Jaakko OH7BF/F5VGL

14

In reply to OE5EEP:

delayed or spoting only the band, not the exact frequency…

I usually only enter a spot if I can’t already see one that matches. I doubt I’m the only chaser who acts this way. If delays and other forms of information limiting were to be used then they’d need to be applied by SOTAwatch, as only it would have a complete view of spots entered, and it’d quite likely get many more spots submitted by folk who can’t yet see a spot for an activation…

In reply to G3NYY:

However, RBNgate is the catalyst which has given rise to this bad behaviour.

That behaviour has been there since before RBNgate came along, at least on phone modes, and it’s kind-of hard to blame RBNgate, a system that only works on CW and data, for behaviour that’s also seen on phone modes anyway…

A SOTA DX cluster will make things even worse.

Maybe, but it’s already happening one way or another. Much better that it happens in a way that’s at least partly under SOTA control…

RBNgate has also given rise to a lot of confusion by generating spots with the
wrong summit reference.

Yes, it’s definitely more error prone than human operators would be, and it would be good to see that improved, even if it reduced the number of activations it spotted.

73, Rick M0LEP

15

In reply to G3NYY:

A SOTA DX cluster will make things even worse. The
automation of spotting removes the last vestige of skill involved in
finding and identifying an activating station.

I can’t see that cluster changes anything. The spots are already available and have been for years. My phone can even alert me by announcing “NEW SPOT” in CW every few seconds when I chose!

What will we have next? List controllers?

We already seem to have self appointed controllers on SSB, half the reason I try and steer clear of them :slight_smile:

As I have mentioned before, RBNgate has also given rise to a lot of
confusion by generating spots with the wrong summit reference.

I think this is propaganda broadcast by the anti-RBN brigade.
The confusion arises just as often, if not more so, when humans alone get involved!
A quick glance at the most recent postings show that human errors out number RBN errors by 5:1!

All these were human errors. In the same space of time there was one RBN error recorded…

OK1DVM/P - wrong reference today (1 post, latest by OK1DVM, 7 days ago.)
wrong reference on 2013.10.18 from IN3/IT9PWM/P (1 post, latest by IT9PWM, 8 days ago.)
Wrong SPOT by SMS . SV/PL-012 (2 posts, latest by G0RQL, 14 days ago.)
Wrong summit information from DK9ES (1 post, latest by DK9ES, 14 days ago.)
wrong reference DM/BM-348 (1 post, latest by DO7KX, 14 days ago.)

Don’t give up Walt.

73
Pete

16

In reply to G4ISJ:

If only all this were true.

I did several self spots (something else that might encourage the perceived problems?) during my two activations on the Isle of Purbeck this morning. The response was somewhat indifferent with just a slow dribble of a handful of stations. I would have loved an unruly pile up zoo!

I suspect this supposed issue is much exaggerated.

Tom M1EYP

17

In reply to G4ISJ:

A quick glance at the most recent postings show that human errors out
number RBN errors by 5:1!

I suspect there’s a selection effect there. When folk make a mistake with an activation they’re usually keen to correct it, but RBN’s known to get it wrong from time to time, so folk don’t give it quite as much credence, and it doesn’t get mentioned in the reflector posts every time it happens…

73, Rick M0LEP.

18

While there may be negative side-effects of RBNGate, I’d like to point out a positive side-effect. Motivation to learn CW.

I’m currently an SSB operator. The ability to get spotted on a hill which lacks cell coverage is a powerful motivator to learn CW. For me, CW has been one of those, “Oh, yeah… I really ought to learn that someday,” things. RBNGate has changed that into, "I am learning CW now."
Kevin / K4KPK

19

In reply to M1EYP:

I did several self spots (something else that might encourage the
perceived problems?) during my two activations on the Isle of Purbeck
this morning. The response was somewhat indifferent with just a slow
dribble of a handful of stations.

Hardly surprising, Tom, as all your spots were for 12 metres!

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

20

In reply to G3NYY:

I don’t know what it was like then, but it’s wide open now!

73

Brian G8ADD