Well Joe, I agree with you...
But it's pretty obvious from some of the discussions/flamefests that we've seen
lately (and before) on this (and other) subject(s), that there are many who
would DISAGREE with you on exactly what the term "Assisted" means in the
context of the operating contest station environment.
Until there is, if not agreement, then a cease-fire over exactly what the term
is supposed to mean, and in what context... trying to define the role of
Skimmer and similar devices within the concept of the SO/A station will
ultimately fail.
And that's just over exactly what is or isn't an "assisted" station; we haven't
even touched on exactly what or how Skimmer et. al. are actually being used!
73
-----------------------------------------------
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
Date: 2008/06/10 Tue PM 09:06:04 EDT
To: ve4xt@mts.net, "'Kerr,Prof. K.M.'" <k.kerr@abdn.ac.uk>,
'Michael Coslo' <mjc5@psu.edu>,
'cq-contesting cq-contest' <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge
> > You do not have the right to define the debate on your own terms.
> >
> Then, Joe, one question: why do you?
I am not redefining the debate on my own terms as you have done.
I keep trying to bring the debate back to the traditional frame
of reference. "Assisted" is simply a shorthand for defining the
participation by an additional person or persons in an "operator"
role who is not actually making the contacts. Since the term
first came into use, "assisted" has always meant another person,
whether on site or remotely, who provided spotting information.
"Assisted" has never been applied to productivity enhancing
technology of any description - including those technologies that
form the basis of skimmer type systems.
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|