CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time that the contest sponsors officially identif

To: "'cq-contest@contesting.com (cq-contest@contesting.com)'" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time that the contest sponsors officially identify SCP as "assisted?"
From: Michael Adams <mda@n1en.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 16:12:34 +0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I'm not Hans, but I can offer my 2 cents:

If one were to use a tool that presented the audio normally received in one's 
headphones visually, in effect letting you "see" the code being sent (e.g., a 
CW skimmer display, displaying just the audio passband, with no decoding 
occurring), I think that a good argument could be made that that's not really 
assistance.   Your brain is still doing the decoding; it's just doing so based 
on visual rather than aural input.

The problem is that one step is the start of a slippery slope.  

It's difficult to independently verify that someone using such a tool isn't 
relying on a software decode function to assist with the decoding (only if the 
assist is essentially a second opinion).  You turn on the decode function, and 
you're clearly having someone else (in this case, a team of programmers) help 
you with copying the signal.

Or, there's the potential complication of what happens if the tool has the 
ability to display signals outside the range coming into your earphones. What 
if you can see that a tasty mult has just popped up calling CQ 5kc away?  
Arguably you can do that already with bandscopes and panadapters on some 
radios, so maybe even that's not assistance.... but I imagine that most 
software with that capability has the ability to decode as well.  Turn on that 
decode function, and you're clearly over the line into assistance.

Here again, you can't independently verify whether the decode function was on 
or off.  We all ought to be trustworthy enough to be on the honor system for 
such things...but that sadly doesn't seem to be the case in the wild.

I can empathize with those who are finding that hearing loss or tinnitus means 
"copying by eye" is a more viable option than "copying by ear", but I think for 
relatively simplicity it makes sense for contest sponsors to rule that tools 
that decoders constitute assistance even when the decode function is turned off.

-- 
Michael Adams | N1EN | mda@n1en.org

-----Original Message-----

We had a brief discussion about code readers on our local contest club 
reflector. Some felt the same way you do. I don’t, but would like to understand 
your reasoning for thinking a code reader is not assistance. I haven’t gotten 
what I see as a reasonable explanation yet, but am still open to listening.

Kevan

N4XL

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>