Pete, that's like saying that a fishing guide only rows the boat.
73,
de Hans, K0HB
--
"Just a boy and his radio"
On Dec 2, 2012, at 5:27, Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr@contesting.com> wrote:
> Charly, the only thing that Skimmer replaces is the physical act of tuning
> the radio. An operator still must copy the CW,. verify that he is copying
> the station spotted (instead of the one adjacent to it), copy the exchange,
> and send and receive verification of his exchange. Moreover, a running
> station receives no assistance from CW Skimmer at all.
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
> http://reversebeacon.net,
> blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
> For spots, please go to your favorite
> ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.
>
> On 11/30/2012 8:42 PM, Charles Harpole wrote:
>> Dave, any time a trend gets a name, like Luddite, that name substitutes for
>> thinking (like a name for a racial type of person). Further, it is typical
>> of rigid personalities to reject reasoned criticism of something they have
>> a powerful and even vested interest in, extending to the point of
>> identifying the subject (ham radio) or object (a beloved radio brand) with
>> the inner human self.
>>
>> Often that rejection of reasoned criticism goes on to try to throw out the
>> person delivering the critique and the creation of a "protected zone" of
>> isolation from critiques. That latter step guarantees the "inside crowd"
>> of insulation from any contrary thinking and thus ossification of that
>> crowd (similar to Romney's advisers thinking that he will win even to
>> election day due to listening only to the "inside crowd").
>>
>> The use of pejorative language, like "childish and shrill," further is a
>> symptom of the reduction of a reasoned line of comment to a simplistic
>> kneejerk reaction devoid of reason.
>> The care of elephants is a noble occupation and one which I wish I could
>> do, but it is very expensive, beyond my means.
>>
>> My overall point remains, and that is that not every new invention is
>> automatically good (like the atomic bomb, but I guess you would like that)
>> and, further, the careful use of new inventions means evaluating their real
>> usefulness and long term benefits and drawbacks of the item or idea. That
>> evaluation can not occur in the vacuum of blind acceptance of "the new."
>>
>> The result of the innovation of the CW Skimmer is, I argue, the reduction
>> of a time-honored practice of the art of radio communication and the joy of
>> learning and doing something that is difficult, beneficial to the person,
>> and elegant. Just as there is no art to making a telephone call, today,
>> there is no art in the mechanical delivery of CW messages via an easy
>> machine.
>>
>> What I affirm is that ham radio exists for what I call "a higher fun" which
>> eschews the easy and simplistic by seeking the complex and activities that
>> yield deep satisfaction that comes from taking on a task and goal and
>> accomplishing that after due effort. In any other context, ham radio is a
>> firmly obsolete mode of communication, so I see the hobby as similar to
>> collecting, restoring, and using antique cars... which occurs for the joy
>> of the activity rather than looking for the easiest transportation. Why
>> one would seek to put a 12 cylinder turbo charged 2012 motor into a Model T
>> is beyond me, and seems to be simply arcane. Thus, I advocate the practice
>> of ham radio as close to its origins in order to preserve the values
>> inherent there and the "higher fun" of this path.
>>
>> Of course, the Skimmer type stuff also forever makes ham radio contesting a
>> rather pointless activity, devoid of those pleasures I describe. I mourn
>> the loss of this fun for you and future generations.
>>
>> 73, Charly
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 5:56 AM, Dave Zeph <zephd@indy.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Charlie you dislike every development in Amateur Radio so vehemently that
>>> I wonder instead of your childish and shrill posts you take up another
>>> hobby instead. You accomplish nothing except to paint yourself as the Post
>>> Child Luddite.l****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Based on where you live might I suggest Elephant Husbandry?****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Dave, W9PA****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> *From:* Charles Harpole [mailto:hs0zcw@gmail.com]
>>> *Sent:* Friday, 30 November, 2012 11:04
>>> *To:* zephd@indy.rr.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [CQ-Contest] How isthe Skimmer different?****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Dave, thanks for your message because it gives me practice at holding my
>>> temper with a purposeful blockhead.****
>>>
>>> ****
>>>
>>> My point was that RTTY and PSK are the real computer digital modes and if
>>> an op wanted more automated work, he should go to these modes and stop
>>> messing up a classic skill that would do any operator well and proud to
>>> operate with skill and grace.****
>>>
>>> ****
>>>
>>> Geeze, some just cant get it. 73, Charly****
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Dave Zeph <zephd@indy.rr.com> wrote:****
>>>
>>> Hate to break it to you, but there is a RTTY Skimmer.
>>>
>>> And DAMN - PSK is a Digital Mode requiring a computer to decode.
>>>
>>> Guess you are just out of luck.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dave, W9PA****
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>>> Charles Harpole
>>> Sent: Thursday, 29 November, 2012 20:03
>>> To: David Gilbert; CQ-Contest Reflector
>>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] How isthe Skimmer different?
>>>
>>> Dave, et al.....
>>>
>>> Very few automated CW methods allow a person to win a CW contest WITHOUT
>>> KNOWING ANY CODE except the CW Skimmer, partly due to the accuracy of this
>>> cursed system. True, spots can give you call signs, too, but their
>>> accuracy is less.
>>>
>>> For the record, I do not use CW decoders, spotting networks, nor band maps
>>> and I do send every contact with a squeeze key. I do this for two
>>> reasons... one is I enjoy using a superior skill (compared to reading a
>>> computer screen) and two is I am using copying CW with only ears and brain
>>> and sending CW by hand as a way to keep my aging brain/hand system
>>> working. My mom kept sharp in her advancing years with crossword puzzles,
>>> I am using CW.
>>>
>>> My point still stands....the joy of using CW as it was invented to be used
>>> is greater and more deeply satisfying than milking the preprepared pap from
>>> CW Skimmer or other automatic devices. I compared this situation to
>>> natural vs. artificial s*x, and was banned for saying that by the ****
>>> Florida****
>>> Contest Group's reflector, so here goes here.
>>>
>>> Natural and joyful is really better, try it some time. 73, Charly
>>>
>>> PS, if the Skimmer is actually really keeping CW alive on the bands, I say
>>> go to RTTY or PSK for full automation and forget the mode that started
>>> radio.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:03 PM, David Gilbert
>>> <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's really pretty funny considering that you cannot in the least tell
>>>> on the air whether the person you are working is using CW Skimmer or not.
>>>>
>>>> Your English may be fine but your logic definitely is not. You can think
>>>> of CW Skimmer as simply the combination of a few other things that have
>>>> been in existence (and legal for contesting) for many years:
>>>>
>>>> a. CW decoders
>>>>
>>>> b. spotting networks (when claiming an assisted category)
>>>>
>>>> c. bandmaps
>>>>
>>>> Your rant is sadly misplaced. I can think of other things like Super
>>>> Check Partial and "History" Files generated by others that have
>>> contributed
>>>> far more to the lessening of skill in radiosport than does CW Skimmer,
>>> and
>>>> I can almost guarantee that you use your logger or a memory keyer to
>>>> actually send CW instead of using a hand key dit-by-dah as did those
>>>> "founding users" (whatever that means). And you do know that hams,
>>>> including those who use CW Skimmer, are pretty much the only ones keeping
>>>> this elegant communication mode alive, right?? All those other users
>>>> simply abandoned it long ago in favor of modes requiring even less
>>> operator
>>>> skill.
>>>>
>>>> For the record, I have never used CW Skimmer in text decode mode during a
>>>> contest ... but I see absolutely no difference between it and other forms
>>>> of assistance when following the rules of the contest. Please explain to
>>>> me how I am wrong ... but try using logic this time.
>>>>
>>>> Dave AB7E
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/29/2012 2:05 AM, Charles Harpole wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I enjoy trying to use the English language to be specific and
>>> expressive.
>>>>> Here is my latest effort..............
>>>>>
>>>>> The CW Skimmer is an obscene perversity of ham radio. All the art and
>>>>> skill of this elegant communication mode, CW, is destroyed. The
>>> founding
>>>>> users of Morse Code, who saved ships and passed millions of messages
>>> vital
>>>>> and mundane, are dishonored. The joy of doing a difficult activity well
>>>>> is
>>>>> lost. Ham radio in general and contesting specifically is changed
>>> forever
>>>>> for the worse by this abomination.
>>>>>
>>>>> ****
>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/cq-contest<
>>> http://lists.conte
>>> sting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Charly, HS0ZCW****
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest****
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Charly, HS0ZCW****
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|