[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Assisted or not assisted question

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Assisted or not assisted question
From: "Michael D. Adams" <mda@ab1od.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 19:41:17 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:40 PM, KU7Y <ku7y.cw@gmail.com> wrote:
> One of the things that many less skilled CW operators do is use a CW decoder
> to help them identify a run station and get their exchange before calling.
> This lets them participate in the contest and have fun while learning.  The
> more time these new folks spend in the contest, the better they get.  And
> many of them wind up becoming good CW ops.
> I would think that we need to encourage people to not only use such help as
> a decoder but to also make the whole process of sending in their log as
> simple as possible.  After all, these are the true contest operators of
> tomorrow.

I'd like to think I resemble that remark.  :)

Last year's WPX was the first CW test I ever attempted...9 days after
my first CW QSO.   I did use a CW decoder...and I submitted my log as
an assisted entry as a result.

Note that I'm not trying to say that CW decoders should be verboten --
I'm not that much of a hypocrite.  I'm just suggesting that they are
"assistance", and that's OK.

Michael D. Adams (AB1OD)
Poquonock, Connecticut | mda@ab1od.org
CQ-Contest mailing list

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