Hi George:
I think this paradigm is too limited: "no outside source of Call/QRG". As
stated, it permits local skimmers/multi-channel decoders and totally automated
stations. I strongly believe that these items should not be allowed in any
"Unassisted" (pick a name :-)) category.
I also think RTTY is different than CW/SSB, but I'm not a RTTY contester.
For CW/SSB contests, I propose: You receive NO information about propagation,
active stations, band openings, or solar conditions by any means other than
received by ear from the band(s) used in the contest and directly from the
station involved.
I haven't been able to come up with a better formulation of a paradigm than "by
ear" to prohibit automated stations or local skimmers. This also, as stated,
would prohibit band scopes/panadapters. It also prevents the "did you hear
VY1JA" sort of conversations in Sweepstakes. :-)
It does put people who use CW decoders in the "Assisted" (pick a name :-))
class unless the sponsor makes an explicit exception. How to word that
exemption to eliminate automated stations and multi-channel decoders isn't
obvious to me....
73,
Mark, KD4D
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Dubovsky" <n4ua.va@gmail.com>
To: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Cc: w2up@comcast.net, "CQ Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>, john@kk9a.com,
wa5rtg@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 9:18:49 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time that the contest sponsors officially
identify SCP as "assisted?"
Hans,
Perhaps it's time to change your tagline to "Just an Old Man and His
Radio"... ;-)
73,
geo - n4ua
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Radio K0HB <kzerohb@gmail.com> wrote:
> The "no code reader" rule bugs me a little bit.
>
>
>
>
> It seems a departure from the "no outside source of Call/QRG" paradigm
> which previously was the generally accepted definition of assistance.
>
>
>
>
> Perhaps the sponsor could share their rationale for this restriction. As
> a long time CW guy with failing ears...... Well, let's just say that it's
> a growing crowd.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __73, de Hans, K0HB
>
> "Just a Boy and His Radio"™
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:37 PM, w2up@comcast.net <w2up@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Yes, automation is on the way. Last month I drove from Denver to
> Vegas and back with no foot on the pedal and no hands on the steering wheel
> for 1400 of the 1700 mile trip. Compared to that, automated contesting is
> easy!
> > Barry W2UP
> > Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Smartphone
> > ------ Original message------From: Stan StocktonDate: Wed, Dec 2, 2015
> 8:35 AMTo: john@kk9a.com;Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com;Subject:Re:
> [CQ-Contest] Is it time that the contest sponsors officially identify SCP
> as "assisted?"
> > Making code readers cause you to be in assisted category is a stop
> measure to total automation. After lunch the other day, my bother who is
> not a ham and who heard nothing but talk of all this for an hour during
> lunch, told me that it seemed a very small step to go from what is being
> done by a human to total automation.73...Stan, K5GO/ZF2ET> On Dec 2, 2015,
> at 8:00 AM, "john@kk9a.com" wrote:> > Until recently I thought that
> assisted meant getting outside assistance to> find stations, typically
> multipliers. Skimmer made this more complicated> as it really is not anyone
> else helping you find stations. Then the> committee changed the rules to
> include code readers as assisted. Certainly> logging software and computer
> generated CW are also some type of> assistance or why would we use them.
> There would be no way to run on two> bands simultaneously using a keyer and
> pad of paper. Where does this end?> > John KK9A> > > To:
> cq-contest@contesting.com> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Is it time that the
> contest sponsors officially> identify SCP as "assisted?"> From:
> kr2q@optimum.net> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 23:26:40 +0000 (GMT)>
> List-post: mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>> Yes, the sponsors (or
> their committees) make the rules and the definitions.> > In CQWW and other
> contests, use of a database to alter calls is not> allowed...post contest.>
> > There can be zero doubt that using SCP is using a database assembled by>
> others.> Is there really a difference in changing a callsign during the
> contest via> use> of a db as> compared to changing it after the contest via
> a database? Think about it.> > Please focus on the "database" aspect
> rather than the timing aspect.> > If CQWW can recognize use of a CW decoder
> (any type, not just skimmer> type) as> assisted,> then why not recognize
> use of SCP as assisted?> > For me (IMHO), use of SCP is far more "assisted"
> than use of a cw decoder.> > If SCP partial is not helping you "copy" the
> callsign, then why use it? > Would> you be happy> to operate without it?
> If yes, then say so. If no, say so...and please> clarify why not.> > This
> is an old tune for me. See my NCJ article from May 1996, which covers>
> many topics,> including SCP. Don't have it available? Write me and I'll
> send you a copy.> > Some things never change....or can they?> > Usual
> disclaimer about my opinion versus my membership on the CQWWCC.> > de Doug
> KR2Q> > _______________________________________________> CQ-Contest mailing
> list> CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest_______________________________________________CQ-Contest
> mailing listCQ-Contest@contesting.comhttp://
> lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
_______________________________________________
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
|