CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Robotic contest operating, why knot?

To: k9yc@arrl.net, cq-contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>, doctore@well.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Robotic contest operating, why knot?
From: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 18:07:14 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
So, you are modifying the program then. Is that what you meant by "If I had an automated CQ (which doesn't seem that technically difficult)"?

This is the part that people either maliciously or ignorantly fail to understand, acknowledge and accept.

We saw a post yesterday mentioning that a CW robot was developed and used around 30 years ago. Are we going to switch to a "phone robot challenge" now, so as to continue with this silliness?

73 de Vince, VA3VF

On 2018-12-18 3:08 p.m., Jim Brown wrote:
On 12/18/2018 11:41 AM, Alan M. Eshleman wrote:
  If I had an automated CQ (which doesn't seem that technically difficult) that would have been a fully computer controlled QSO.  What am I missing here?

WSJT-X was intentionally written so that operator intervention is required before you can have another QSO.

73, Jim K9YC
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>