Paul EI5DI wrote:
> On 24/07/2013 18:16, Radio K0HB wrote:
> > If using a local decoder causes some newcomer to dabble in CW and in
> > contesting, then I see no reason for a prohibition. You and I won't
> > be required to use them, and the dabbler will likely jump in once he
> > realizes the limitations of machine decoding.
> And if using a third wheel causes a newcomer (who can't balance on two) to
> dabble in cycle races, then I see every reason for prohibition - because
all
> they do is get in the way of the competitors who are prepared.
By that reasoning, you could argue that everyone who cannot copy or send QRQ
and who isn't operating QRO ought to be excluded, because they are "only"
getting in the way of competitors who are better prepared.
Next CQWW, why don't we just limit the competitors to just those who have
big contest superstations, since they are obviously the only ones who are
prepared?
Speaking from personal experience, a rookie who is relying on a code reader
is going to have a lousy rate, a lousy log-check report, and will quickly
learn about the perils of running while so impaired. Some of them,
however, will have fun in spite of the disadvantages....and they'll get bit
by the CW bug, learn, and come back for more.
--
Michael D. Adams (N1EN)
Poquonock, Connecticut | mda@n1en.org
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|