Paul,
Obviously there is no way to stop technology from advancing or to keep
people from writing software and developing systems that will eventually
automate the contest experience. Within a few years I believe a
successful multi-multi station will have several automated stations on a
band at any given time jumping on every Skimmer spot, with smart
software that will take into account signal strength, whether the
station is a new multiplier or just a new contact, etc. Some will like
it, some will not. In order for most contesters to be happy, the
contest organizers will hopefully continue to draw the lines and define
which category will be able to use what technologies. As technology
advances, the same types of decisions will need to be made again and
again.
I am happy with the compromise decision regarding the use of Skimmer and
admit I love using it in conjunction with packet in a multi-operator
category where packet and Skimmer are allowed and necessary in order to
compete.
For every person who decides not to participate because they don't like
the way the game is played, perhaps there will be those who will
participate when they would not have otherwise.
My thoughts of building a big moonbounce antenna quickly went to the
bottom of the list when I learned that in order to be competitive you
would need to be using a system to work stations you could not possibly
work listening to the audio from the receiver with your own ears.
Perhaps some decided to try moonbounce because they can now make
contacts with a lot less hardware and effort.
While most everything you say is fact, it is clear that technology will
continue to advance and those who have control over which categories in
which it is allowed will most likely continue to have an unassisted
category beyond when it ceases to be the most popular one. Like some
others, I really have no problem being on the same band as someone who
is using different technology in another category than me, as long as I
eventually know who was in which category.
Hopefully we will never reach the point when the premier "radio contest"
is on HamSphere, albeit an interesting internet application.
Stan, K5GO
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
To: "reflector cq-contest" <CQ-Contest@Contesting.COM>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] A new "DX cluster" experience for contesters
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kelly Taylor" <theroadtrip@mts.net>
>
>> The question, then, is at what point does technology become
>> unsuitable for contests of skill?
>
> I have already suggested an answer to this question, although
> I've used the word "inappropriate" rather than "unsuitable".
>
> It is when the effect of the technology would be disproportionate
> or when it would change the nature of the activity conerned.
>
> I hold the quaint old-fashioned notion that the nature of
> amateur radio, and of contesting in particular, is to use only
> amateur band RF and modes to find and work other contesters.
>
> <snip>
>
>> is it (a DX contest) a test of the whole bag of skills that
>> go in to the art of working DX? Or is it a test of your
>> ability to integrate all available technology into a
>> winning score?
>
> It is a test of both skill and technology, so long as that
> technology does not change the nature of the activity.
> To the extent that the internet replaces RF, there can be
> no question that the nature of contesting has indeed changed.
>
>> Where does that line get crossed?
>
> By replacing RF with any other communications technology,
> so that the wires have been put back into wireless.
>
>> If I don't even have to decode a QSO myself;
>
> Well, that's not putting the wires back into wireless,
> but it could mean that you have reduced CW to the status
> of just another data mode - you may or may not want that.
>
>> Or is it enough to say that there's an unlimited category
>> and those who want to push the envelope compete by themselves
>> and those who want to stay traditional can stay in the
>> unassisted?
>
> An unlimited category is a meaningless concept. When
> there are no constraints there can be no real competition.
> How about unlimited mountaineering where you use helicopters
> to get to the top? No one has yet done it on Everest.
>
> I suggest it's time to time to abandon the outdated
> notion of unassisted and assisted, and call it what it
> is - amateur radio contesting and internet contesting.
>
> I'm an "unassisted" amateur radio contester, and I
> welcome all the help I can get from modern technology
> so long as it doesn't replace RF or decode CW for me.
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|