OK guys, we are seeing lots of great discussion and opinion about the skimmer. Also calls for the rule making process to be transparent. However, we aren't seeing a lot of proposals or discussion abo
Hello Randy, Here we go. A. Single Operator: Single band or all band; those stations at which one person performs all of the operating, logging, and spotting functions. A-1. Single Operator High: onl
Hhhmmmmm, interesting.... OK, here's a starting point. Proposed rule for Single Op: "A single operator performs all functions that decode recovered intelligence from the radio spectrum. No other assi
Hi Randy, I'm not a lawyer and don't even play one on TV... This is my suggestion for defining the SO categories. Perhaps renaming the categories SO Bare Bones and SO High Tech might eliminate some o
Hello W4TV, That's a way to separate the SO1R and SO2R entrants. Most contests have separate High/Low/QRP power categories. Since I don't see any skills involved in hooking the ampli to the rest of t
I had written this a while time back, when we heard skimming for single-ops was okay for 2008 WPX CW. K5ZD has since requested suggestions for rule changes, but seeing how what we do is based on rule
Huh? It is just amazing how so many choose to ignore B as a further explanation of difference between SO and SOA. Without CQ Mag. knowing that skimmer is commeth, rules clearly indicate that "DX aler
Yuri, You said: "Assisted - was meant to mean another OPERATOR - person, not assistance by computer, keyer, software, foot switch. (B fortifies that) " B is defining Single Op Assisted. It is not def
No, but by describing "the other side" of "DX alerting assistance" by logic, it indicates that it refers to a PERSON and not a GADGET. As far as I know, the "any kind" was to cover telephones, intern
I'm with OV. The word 'any' is pretty all-inclusive. After 30 years in professional writing, I have a pretty good idea what the word 'any' means. Those that speculate that it only refers to other peo
This looks like a good place to interject. The rule such as it is, is simply not capable of addressing the Skimmer. Skimmer is technology that was for the most part, not even conceived at the time. S
A dumb contester might do that, but a good operator would just let it populate his WriteLog bandmap, then periodically harvest the band map. The advantage that this would be to a single-op in SS CW
Wait. Right now the best operators with the best equipment and good luck win. Add Skimmer to the mix and the best operators with the best equipment and good luck still win. If skimmer would allow a m
So how do we determine it's actual impact? We allow it's use for a time so gauge that impact. If Skimmer users start dominating classes, then it might be time to direct it's use to one category or an
Mike, Change your luck...come to Jamaica! ;) David ~ KY1V Wait. Right now the best operators with the best equipment and good luck win. Add Skimmer to the mix and the best operators with the best equ
There is no doubt that technology of any kind provides "assistance" to the operator. That applies to productivity enhancing technologies like memory keyers, digital voice keyers, computer logging, co
Part 1: The information provided by the Skimmer is quite time sensitive. Those who are running a frequency tend to stay mostly put, others move about a lot. My estimate is that the info provided by t
It seems the only people now arguing that computer logging, auto-tune amplifiers or the like should constitute "assistance" are those arguing for the unfettered release of Skimmer into the contesting
I think what we (the not so smart people according to VE4XT), are looking for is consistency in the arguments. Packet spotting was banned for SO because other operators are feeding the SO with inform
I would hope that the major contest sponsors and rule makers, in response to technology changes such as CW Skimmer, would try to refine their category definitions and regulations based upon a rationa