For me personally, my station QTH is a long way from any power, cable, phone
lines, or any other reasonably convenient access to any sort of internet or
packet info, unless I choose to set up a VHF link, or spend money just to
have internet access. I have no packet access, nor do I want it. My
choice, I know.
So I do not want to be forced to compete against operators who use packet to
get the assistance of other operators. I agree totally that anyone who uses
packet is a Multi-operator. IMHO, anyone who uses packet and calls himself
a SO, unassisted, is lying to himself or cheating.
Obviously, if the rules permit packet use by "Single Operators" then it is
not cheating. But only if the rules explicitly permit it.
"Just a guy with a radio" and of course I use a computer, amp, rotator,
antenna, Rigblaster, etc., but absolutely NO ASSISTANCE from any other
operators. I enjoy the challenge of seeing what I can do by myself!
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Fremin III" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Yuri VE3DZ" <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 10:59 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 02:08:26PM -0500, Yuri VE3DZ wrote:
>> I don't like Dx Cluster, but the reality is - like it or not - almost
>> everyone is using it nowadays, one way or another. I mean 99.9 % of the
>> stations have the capability of using Dx Cluster today.
>> So, why not just allow it for all categories, like it was done for WAE or
>> Russian DX long time ago?
>> What are we afraid of here?
> I do not think it is fear. It is that I do not find it as
> much fun to do the contest as assisted and if everyone is
> in the assisted category than I have to make the choice of:
> - Run packet and not have as much fun.
> - Not run packet and be at a disadvantage.
> So - I guess most would end up running packet and the non-packet way
> of operating disappears. That would sadden me. I and others could
> keep going on without packet and see how well we do against others
> that use packet. That has it's own appeal. I already do this in
> other contests - but usually it is that I am trying to achieve a
> better score than the multi ops.
> It would also mean that places that do not have a way to get packet at
> all or easily are at a disadvantage. (they do still exist - even if
> it is only a few)
> But as others have pointed out - why stop at packet?
> Why have any categories at all - just put all the scores in a big
> pile. This is not a new idea - we could just list them in score order
> from the M/M DX to the QRP/poor antenna stations. We will just assume
> that they all use high power and packet.
> George Fremin III - K5TR
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list