Doug,
I agree 100%. This seems to me to be the core of the debate. ANYTHING which
finds, identifies and displays potential QSO partners in a way that the SO
without this particular technology could not IS what we currently understand as
ASSISTANCE.
If this is accepted, I see no need to change rules.
Keith GM4YXI (GM7V)
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of kr2q@optimum.net
Sent: 16 June 2008 02:10
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] single-op pornography
Defining "Assisted," especially in terms of Skimmer is somewhat like
pornography - "I know it when I see it." [Justice Potter Stewart] In other
words, observation tells much.
Watch a single op and then watch a single-op using DX alerting methods.
What they do and especially how they do it are different.
Then watch a single-op using skimmer. Which one does skimmer look like more?
By observation alone (someone standing in the shack, looking at what is
happening).....
the "assisted" op seems to have a-priori knowledge of not only where to go
(qrg) but what call sign to copy (giving the benefit of the doubt by assuming
that they copy the call). Why?
Because they DO have a-priori knowledge of same.
The single-op is "exploring" (unless passing) while the SOA is taking directed
actions.
Comments?
de Doug KR2Q
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|