[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] About Remote Contesting

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] About Remote Contesting
From: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Reply-to: n4zr@contesting.com
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 11:29:34 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Paul, as Hans and others have tried to point out, this is ridiculously 
over the top and out of touch with reality.  There is a huge difference 
between using the Internet for the actual communication between two 
*stations*, and using it as, in effect, an extra-long headphone cord.

73, Pete N4ZR

The World Contest Station Database, updated daily at www.conteststations.com
The Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at 
spots at telnet.reversebeacon.net, port 7000

On 2/27/2011 9:30 AM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
> On 27/02/2011 06:33, K6VVA - Rick wrote:
>> With all the technological advances (like Remoterig) making hands-on (vs.
>> software) remote contesting possible, as many aging contesters get closer to
>> the days of QSY'ing to Assisted Living facilities or moving in with adult
>> children in antenna-restricted tract homes locations, going remote will be
>> the only hope many of our fellow contesters have of still staying in the
>> game to some degree.
> This is the "I'm special" argument all over again.
> I'm poor, I'm old, I'm sick, I can't learn morse,
> my QTH is too small, therefore I deserve to be
> treated differently from other contesters.
>> We are ALL going to die someday, which is why it is important to look for
>> new ways and new technologies to continue enjoying some of the things
>> important to us for as long as we can before the finality of going SK.
> We could apply the same argument to participants
> in any competitive activity and it would be just
> as irrelevant.  New technologies are appropriate
> only when they do not change the activity to the
> extent that its name should change.
> Aging marathon runners might take a ride for part
> of the course.  The only problem is they would no
> longer be marathon runners.
> My objection to remote control in contesting is that
> it introduces something other than amateur-band RF
> (corresponding to the modes and frequencies of entry)
> in the signal path between the operators concerned.
> For some part of the path, some other communications
> mode or communications technology must be used,
> otherwise no QSO could take place.  I'd like to
> emphasise that I'm referring only to what happens
> between station boundaries - within the station
> boundary (the 500-metre rule), anything goes.
> Now, some may insist that it is still amateur radio,
> but I know better :-)   It can only be described as
> some form of hybrid communications.  You may say it
> doesn't matter what I think.  However, if you're
> using the internet (most likely) to make QSOs, and
> could not possibly have those QSOs without the
> internet, then you're doing something fundamentally
> different from me and most other contesters.
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>