We already allow CW decoders. We already allow packet spots. Skimmer does both. Don't change any rules until we have reliable data to change them. What's the problem? Let me answer my own question, t
Paul, Why are those arguing to treat something that walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck as a duck "whiners"? I am not whining about Skimmer: I celebrate the advance in technol
all Paul, We've read a lot of discussion here on this topic from both sides, some of it outspoken, much of it passionate, some of it strident, but all of it thoughtful. But listen as I may, I have >
We accept a separate category for "packet/cluster" because it represents "participation by other individuals" and is different than "ONE OPERATOR." Skimmer is not equivalent to packet because is doe
That's because the entire issue is being looked at through outdated prescription Rose Colored Glasses. The phrase 'involvement of another person' should really be 'involvement or ASSISTANCE of anoth
I've never understood the argument that the rules shouldn't be modified to deal with Skimmer and similar technologies simply because Skimmer doesn't yet work well enough to make a significant differe