VE4ZT: accept it if Skimmer is deemed to be equivalent to packet? Not only equivalent but *indistinguishable* from Packet by log-checking software. If Skimmer is OK for single-op unassisted, and you
There appears to be a lot of people out there who do not have, nor want to train for, the operating skills others possess. Their thinking is to substitute technology for their laziness and/or lack of
Doug, aren't the skills required of a modern contester just different than the skills required 20 years ago? I can't maintain a manual dupe sheet at all well. I never got very good at it. I also have
I don't think laziness (flame bait) is the case at all. I will speculate 90% of contesting participants enter for reasons beyond the expectation to win the competition. To the other 10% of the opera
Eliminating SO Unassisted. Then next step, would be eliminating the SO, because of some multi-ops could declare themselves SOps, and so on with MS, M2R and more radios... David HK1KXA EC5KXA ________
It is great that each of us has a variety of skills and a variety of skill levels. However, because some of us are deficient in some of the human skills needed to become a top cw contester, does not
You do not need cw skills to get a licence any longer. However, this DOES NOT prevent you from acquiring cw skills. If you wish to enter a cw contest, train yourself in cw, regardless of what you did
And is that working? At the last few hamfest VE sessions I observed from outside, I noticed the applicants numbered about the same as they did 10 years ago. 73, Zack W9SZ ____________________________
It would seem to me that most of our technology is purchased. Most no longer design their own radios, antennas etc... Skimmer is not going to make an SSB op a top CW finisher. It might help him and i
We create rules to define the "shape" of each particular class of a competitive event. (That statement and the next one may be so self evident as to sound patronizing, but I think bear saying here.)
take 1000 contest operators, and segregate them according to equipment used: % low end (me, HRO 60, Viking ranger, etc, dipole) % medium (FT101, TS520, tribander) % high end (TS930, FT1000, two anten
Enforceability is irrelevant. We already have all kinds of rules that are impossible to enforce. It's impossible to detect if a single op is getting help with mults from a second ham in the shack. It
Enforcing the rules should not be necessary. Contesting is a matter of skill and knowledge among other things, but above all, players should have two qualities, that everyday are getting harder to fi
after the contest to correct their logs for callsign accuracy. the cheats. This brings me back to a previously unanswered question I submitted to this reflector. If changing a call sign post contest
By definition rules are enforceable; however guidelines are not. Some winners expect quality adjudication where the rules are enforceable. Just because it may be possible to abuse a rule is not a go
Hi David, I respectfully disagree... There is by far more honor and honesty in contesting than there is cheating. Cheats have a higher profile and "sell more papers". We should give more attention to
I think I asked a while back what people's estimates of percentage of cheaters is and I forget what the answers were. But you are always going to get a certain minimum percentage of cheaters in any e
I think a lot of time people don't actually set out to cheat, but to see just how far they can push the rules. Some people like to think, "If it ain't specifically stated I can't do that, I guess I c
New rule, Tom. "Everything not specifically prohibited is mandatory." 73, de Hans, K0HB _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists
I believe that's called The Totalitarian Law of Physics. Fudd's First Law of Opposition: If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. (It certainly applies to towers!) 73, Zack W9SZ ________