A lot of hams are indeed anti technology.
Anything beyond "a boy and his radio" twiddling knobs is viewed as
"not real ham radio."
It's a pervasive attitude in some circles in ham radio.
And it's against both basis and purpose and the amateur's code.
Ria
N2RJ
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 2:58 PM ku8e <ku8e@ku8e.com> wrote:
RiaMaybe you did but before that statement you stated that "Hams are
anti-technology". It seems to me you were suggesting that anyone who
doesn't embrace assisted technology such as skimmer was against technology.
Most serious contesters use lots of technology such as logging computers,
radio control, CW keying, voicekeyers etc...I didn't rant about anything. I
was just stating the facts. BTW not wanting to embrace technology isn't
limited to only amateur radio. I have many older friends and family that
just like doing things the way they always have.JeffSent from my Verizon,
Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: rjairam@gmail.com Date:
8/23/21 7:05 AM (GMT-05:00) To: Jeff Clarke <ku8e@ku8e.com> Cc:
CQ-Contest Reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com> Subject: Re:
[CQ-Contest] Past Prediction of the Future of Contesting. Re-read what I
said. You read the first part then went off on a rantbased on that alone.I
did say you should have a choice. But "Please, no, a thousand timesNO!" by
Hans means that he doesn't want that piece of tech to exist.THAT is being
anti-technology.RiaN2RJOn Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 8:17 PM Jeff Clarke <
ku8e@ku8e.com> wrote:>> Ria,>> With all due respect just because some of
us of us don't want to use> certain technologies doesn't make us "anti
technology"? Do all of us> have to operate the same way using the same
technologies? Have you ever> thought that there are many contesters who
like to operate non-assisted> because it gives them more personal
satisfaction? Personally I get more> satisfaction finding my own contacts
and multipliers instead of> operating in a way that's like catching fish in
a barrel. I can> guarantee there are many contesters who have the same
feeling as I do. I> have no problem if people operate the way they want to.
(assisted or> non-assisted) Unfortunately the Single-Op rule changes in CQ
WPX has> taken away the option to choose the way you want to operate.
Pretty much> you have to operate assisted if you want to have a competitive
score.>> Jeff KU8E>>> On 8/22/2021 5:49 PM, rjairam@gmail.com wrote:> >
97.1 Basis and purpose.> >> > ...> >> > (b) Continuation and extension of
the amateur's proven ability to> > contribute to the advancement of the
radio art.> >> > Hams being so anti technology is mind blowing. I have
never seen such> > a paradox except in ham radio.> >> > (yes, it also talks
about skill but that doesn't mean we have to shun> > technology).> >> > You
don't have to use a voice skimmer, but someone will invent it. I> > hope
that contest rules at least adapt to it - keep the unassisted> > categories
(too late CQ WPX) without skimmer but allow it for assisted> > or
"unlimited" categories.> >> > We already have the existing cluster with all
of the "mechanical> > turks" putting in DX spots anyway.> >> > 73> > Ria,
N2RJ> >> > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 10:01 PM Hans Brakob <kzerohb@gmail.com>
wrote:> >> Please, no, a thousand times NO!> >>> >> 73, de Hans, KØHB> >>
“Just a Boy and his Radio”™> >> ________________________________> >> From:
CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+kzerohb=gmail.com@contesting.com> on
behalf of Richard F DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@gmail.com>> >> Sent: Friday,
August 20, 2021 7:25:35 AM> >> To: Frank Donovan W3LPL (Frank Donovan
W3LPL) <donovanf@erols.com>> >> Cc: reflector cq-contest <
CQ-Contest@contesting.com>> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Past Prediction
of the Future of Contesting.> >>> >> I guess the logical follow-up is
what's next:> >>> >> I vote for voice "skimmer"...> >>> >> 73 Rich NN3W>
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 8:18 AM <donovanf@erols.com> wrote:> >>>
Thanks for sharing this Pete.> >>>> >>>> >>> Many of the forecasts
proved to be accurate, but as often happens> >>> with forecasts , two of
the most revolutionary changes that have> >>> greatly impacted contesting
were totally unanticipated:> >>>> >>>> >>> - CW Skimmer and its associated
Reverse Beacon Network, and> >>> - Explosive growth in the use of digital
error correcting protocols,> >>> especially FT8> >>>> >>>> >>> "It’s tough
to make predictions, especially about the future" – Yogi Berra> >>>> >>>
73> >>> Frank> >>> W3LPL> >>>> >>> ----- Original Message -----> >>>> >>>
From: "Pete Smith N4ZR" <pete.n4zr@gmail.com>> >>> To: "reflector
cq-contest" <CQ-Contest@Contesting.COM>> >>> Sent: Friday, August 20,
2021 2:17:22 AM> >>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Past Prediction of the Future of
Contesting.> >>>> >>> In 2007, ES5TV compiled reflector users'
predictions/guesses/wild-ass> >>> guesses about what contesting would look
like ten years hence. It's now> >>> 4 years past his original time horizon,
and I thought people would find> >>> it interesting, so I've put it in my
Dropbox account at> >>>
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uzpj6vhxuqtp6sf/10%20years%20later.pdf?dl=0>
<https://www.dropbox.com/s/uzpj6vhxuqtp6sf/10%20years%20later.pdf?dl=0>.>
Feel free to download the pdf and giggle...> >>>> >>> --> >>> 73, Pete
N4ZR> >>> Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network> >>> web server at <
http://beta.reversebeacon.net>.> >>> For spots, please use your favorite>
"retail" DX cluster.> >>>> >>>
_______________________________________________> >>> 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>
_______________________________________________> 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