2010/6/1 Kelly Taylor <theroadtrip@mts.net>:
> Hi Brett,
>
> I'd like to see an example of where or how one of us will be harmed by a QSO
> with an operator using a decoder.
Making a QSO benefits us all.
>
> Is it "I had to learn the code, dammit, so everybody else must too"?
>
> I can't imagine that those who can head copy proficiently now will be
> willing to be slowed down by using a decoder. And those who are almost there
> have an incentive to continue the journey. So, are decoders then primarily a
> way to get no-code ops into CW contesting?
There is nothing in the rules about knowing CW.
There is some text about errors in logging and also about assistance
participants use.
>
> Is that bad? We've already heard from at least one op who has said if it
> weren't for a decoder, he'd never turn his radio on during a CW contest.
Excellent!
We have an entrant participating the assisted category!
>
> I'd suggest if there's one element that could hasten the demise of ham
> radio, it's angst about clinging to tradition "because that's always the way
> it's been." And not just angst about clinging to tradition, but angst about
> making damn sure everyone else does, too.
Well, for competition events, there are rules.
People are supposed to play by the book if they participate a competition.
It is a good practise to participate as the others are doing.
Some people taking privileges outside the rules is not really right .. right?
>
> Are we saying that we don't want new people in CW contesting? Are we saying
> that we don't want you in CW contesting if you aren't able to copy yourself?
In case definition 'we' includes me, I answer CW drifts towards
becoming like RTTY is today.
But it is not there yet.
I mean people use computers to create CW. Almost all participants do
so today. Like 75% or more.
Number of people copying CW by ears is the current main stream.
Number of people copying RTTY by ears is a clear minority.
But: people copying CW by a decoding machine is growing.
It is growing fast.
>
> Is this a glass half-empty vs. glass half-full scenario? Wouldn't going up
> against a decoder be the ultimate test? Kinda like Kasparov vs. Big Blue?
There really is no half-assisted category.
Single op entrants either participate on their own or use some kind of
assistance.
The man-machine contest winner is clear.
I bet by 2030 the computers will better humans even on SSB.
For CW, 2015 there is no question which is better; a computer or a human.
Some people can configure their computers better than some others.
>
> Kelly
> ve4xt
The new contester category will rise.
The sys-op category.
73,
Jukka OH6LI
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|