> Why does every suggestion that there remain a skimmerless
> category, just like there remains a packetless category,
> result in someone arguing a point that is not made?
A locally operated Skimmer is completely different than a
network of skimmers. Data from outside is assistance, data
from one's own station, unless it is generated by a second
human operator, is not assistance. It is quite simple, CW
transmitted by another operator or logging performed by
another person is a multi-operator station ... CW transmitted
by a memory keyer or computer and logging by a computer is
single operator. CW copied by a computer is no different
than CW sent by the same computer.
If you want to label CW copied by computer as assistance,
that computer is the assistant and ANYTHING the computer
does is assistance. You can't have it both ways. The
computer is a tool or the computer is assistance - one
or the other. There is no "well maybe" here - this is a
binary choice - yes or no.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Sandy Taylor
> Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 10:13 PM
> To: k1ttt@arrl.net; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Petition to Ban Skimmer
>
>
> Why does every suggestion that there remain a skimmerless
> category, just like there remains a packetless category,
> result in someone arguing a point that is not made?
>
> I only said a skimmerless category, David, OK? Can we get
> that straight?
>
> 73,Kelly
> Ve4xt
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of David
> Robbins K1TTT
> Sent: May-06-08 3:33 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Petition to Ban Skimmer
>
> > Pete's hit the nail on the head on three counts: it is certainly
> > possible some are overestimating the impact of skimmer. It is also
> > true that new technology should not be banned. And it is also true
> > that a separate, boy-and-his-radio class (no skimmer, no packet, no
> > trained orangutan (to tune the amp, of
> > course!) should remain.
>
> So just where DO you draw the line... no computer keying? No
> computer logging(now REQUIRED in some contests)?? No web
> access for propagation data, only what you can copy from wwv
> on the air?? No auto-tune amps or antenna tuners?? No dsp
> filters in the radios? no external dsp boxes?
>
>
> David Robbins K1TTT
> e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
> web: http://www.k1ttt.net
> AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> > bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of ve4xt@mts.net
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 15:25
> > To: Pete Smith; cq-contest@contesting.com
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Petition to Ban Skimmer
> >
> >
> > I would hope that the people arguing for a ban would give
> their heads
> > a shake and realize that the ONLY reason amateur radio
> exists at all
> > is for the furtherance of new technology.
> >
> > That doesn't mean that new technology should be unleashed into
> > contests unfettered, but it should not be banned.
> >
> > 73, kelly
> > ve4xt
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Banning the technology from contests will have no useful
> effect. By
> > > all means, retain a single-op unassisted class without it (like
> > > packet), and let the marketplace decide.
> > >
> > >
> > > 73, Pete N4ZR
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|