Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Skimmer\s+musings\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Skimmer\s+musings\s*$/: 19 ]

Total 19 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: R P Davis <bob@reconstructinghistory.com>; Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 13:50:17 -0400; alerting First, your whole argument rides on the assumption that Skimmer is always defined as "Dx alerting assistance", which is not self-evident; that's one of the things this debate is trying to ha; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00447.html (11,691 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: Guy Molinari <guy_molinari@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 00:33:49 +0000; I suspect you haven't read the e-mails. I think the debate has been rather thoughtful and healthy for the sport. If I didn't, I would probably opt out of the mailing list. A choice open to all of us; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00453.html (10,164 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: prickler.schneider@t-online.de; Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 09:23:15 +0200; Exactly in the same sense as marathon runners would feel threatend if engine driven wheel chairs were allowed in the same category - taking out the individual human challenge. But other than in runni; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00456.html (8,785 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: bob@reconstructinghistory.com; Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 05:41:49 -0500 (EST); I have contemplated opting out of the list, because while this debate at least has been (mostly) respectful, it has seldom been thoughtful and quite often so pedantic as to be little more than an exe; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00457.html (11,859 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: R P Davis <bob@reconstructinghistory.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 15:29:12 -0400; Guy, I understand that SO2R is difficult to learn and even more difficult to master. I have not yet begun on that path (as my scores in recent contests will show!), though I hope to give such a chall; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00460.html (10,285 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: "Peter Voelpel" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 14:13:46 +0200; Time to ban computers and other gimmicks from the shack. Just the man, his radio, straight key and the paper log ;-)) Will be interesting to see whether a "traditional" category will evolve besides a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00461.html (8,271 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: Guy Molinari <guy_molinari@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 16:00:14 +0000; Bob, SO2R is about a human being developing the skills to decode two audio streams. One in each ear. It is hard to learn and if done incorrectly will actually reduce your score. This is proven fact a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00463.html (14,743 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: Joe Hetrick <kc0vkn@bitjanitor.net>; Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 12:01:44 -0500; if engine driven wheel chairs were allowed in the same category - taking out the individual human >challenge. But other than in running we have no definition and no consensus to what extent the human; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00465.html (12,617 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 15:13:37 -0500; Thanks for hitting the nail on the head, Bob. It's good to have a forum and this is definitely a complex question. "Intent of the founders" is always a tricky argument to make and yet it has a lot o; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00466.html (8,199 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: "Ward Silver" <hwardsil@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 19:50:21 -0700; Dealing with automated reception differently than automated transmission is appropriate because only reception can initiate a QSO; whether in response to a solicitation (CQ) or from tuning to a soli; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00472.html (8,540 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:13:02 -0400; Ward, The same can be said for automated transmission (using a keyer to call CQ): only a solicitation (calling CQ) can result in a QSO. Unless someone "advertises" that they are on frequency and read; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00478.html (9,668 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: "Ward Silver" <hwardsil@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:16:49 -0700; You can cast the lure as much as you want, but if no fish bites, you have not caught a fish. There must be a reception event to trigger the process by which a QSO is conducted. Both reception and tr; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00481.html (13,268 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: "Ed Muns" <w0yk@msn.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 12:08:59 -0700; Hopefully, all of us who feel compelled to "transmit" our opinions and emotions about skimmer will take some time out to "receive". I've found Ward's few, but thoughtful, postings on the topic to be; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00497.html (15,531 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: "Ward Silver" <hwardsil@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:11:47 -0700; There is a big difference between alternating transmissions between two channels and receiving on dozens and dozens of channels. It is not that antenna systems are not a distinguishing factor - ever; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00505.html (14,261 bytes)
15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: Jack Brindle <jackbrindle@earthlink.net>; Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:20:04 -0700; Ward; Congrats on the Dayton award. As we have seen, you have definitely earned it! This is where I disagree. The use of memory keyers did not significantly change contest operation until they became; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00511.html (13,625 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: Guy Molinari <guy_molinari@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:32:48 +0000; Give SO2R a try. One will quickly find out that it is definitely NOT an automated second operator. Learning to decode two separate audio streams would be trivial for the technology behind skimmer. It; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00534.html (16,402 bytes)
17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: Jack Brindle <jackbrindle@earthlink.net>; Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:31:50 -0700; Guy; I'm definitely not anti-SO2R, just as I'm not anti-Skimmer. Just trying to find some common ground among all the arguments. Having listened to some SO2R CDs, I very much appreciate the skills th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00541.html (19,128 bytes)
18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: VR2BrettGraham <vr2bg@harts.org.hk>; Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 02:21:04 +0000; W6FB responded to N0AX responding to someone we can no longer tell (maybe W4TV?): SO2R predated computer logging by many decades. What computer logging has done has made it possible for more people t; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00543.html (12,684 bytes)
19. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings (score: 1): Author: Guy Molinari <guy_molinari@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 02:43:03 +0000; Hi Jack, I haven't been at this long enough to know what contesting was like before computers. I suspect the debate forum wasn't an Internet hosted mailing list. Maybe folks actually debated those is; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00544.html (20,941 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 19
Page: [1]