CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer

To: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>, 'Randy Thompson' <k5zd@charter.net>, 'Pete Smith' <n4zr@contesting.com>, CQ-Contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer
From: Julius Fazekas <phriendly1@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 06:02:38 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

> Any attempt to marginalize skimmer by forcing its
> users into 
> as "assisted" category is nothing more than a petty
> attempt 
> by the elite and those who benefit from favored
> locations to 
> maintain the status quo and deny otherwise top
> operators a tool 
> that might give them a compensating advantage. 


Joe,

I don't think anyone is trying to marginalize skimmer
technology, nor do I think that the "assisted"
category is to be considered inferior to "unassisted".
There are elite in both categories. 

It's too bad there appears to be a stigma attached to
being assisted. Maybe it's better to call it
"unlimited", so folks can use any tool or resource
that comes up.

If everyone is allowed to use skimmer, how would that
change the status quo. The elite stations in the best
locations would have the same tool, with the same
advantage they had before. To me all this does is
raise the cost for the little guy.

cheers,
Julius
n2wn


Julius Fazekas
N2WN

Tennessee Contest Group
TnQP http://www.tnqp.org/

Elecraft K2/100 #3311
Elecraft K2/100 #4455
Elecraft K3/100 #366
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>