Kelly, You do not have the right to define the debate on your own terms. "Assistance" has always been a shorthand to define a situation where information was provided BY ANOTHER OPERATOR who was not
Then, Joe, one question: why do you? 73, kelly ve4xt _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq
How about that: the line could be drawn when it is not about doing things easier or more convenient by using a computer - but by letting the computer do things that are impossible for any human to do
Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:50:50 -0500
OK, I'll take a shot at it. This is a hard one because there is so much that needs to be defined and spelled out these days. I took a basic approach to not direct my efforts so much at CW Skimmer but
Perhaps we are looking too hard for an answer. Prior to the advent of Skimmer, we were (largely) happy with how we defined SO(U) and SO(A), and we arrived at these two categories over an extended per
"Assistance" has always been a shorthand to define a situation where information was provided BY ANOTHER OPERATOR who was not actually making the contacts. The "assisted" entry category was created a
You can't expect the sponsors and rule makers to be clairvoyant. Or to work in a vacuum! I have seen very few actual rules proposals floated here compared to the volume of dialog on the subject of sk
I am not redefining the debate on my own terms as you have done. I keep trying to bring the debate back to the traditional frame of reference. "Assisted" is simply a shorthand for defining the parti
I think the key is to define what constitutes assistance. Once you have done that, then an operator either IS or IS NOT assisted. Assistance, for the purposes of this contest, shall be construed to m
Hi Randy I guess the one thing I would add to my renaming of SO(U) to SO (Classic) and SO(A) to SO(Unlimited) posting: Clearly, time is a factor in these discussions, and we probably only have a few
Hmmm, Joe, if I am not mistaken, you were very much against SO2R being in the unassisted catagory. I tried to find some of the old emails, but lost them somewhere. Maybe I'm wrong on that. What is th
You are correct in saying that SOA is not competitive as a whole with Single Operator but cannot draw any conclusions as to the benefit or lack of benefit the spotting the assisted stations receive b
I think maybe you misconstrued my comment. I never proposed nor meant to constrain suggestions or comments on this topic. I've found each and every part of th discussion to be interesting, and I assu
Since nobody commented on it at the time, let me dust off the proposal made several weeks ago by N3BB, somewhat shortened and simplified to focus on the key issue. Single Op Operates the station equi
Joe, ""Assisted" is simply a shorthand for defining the participation by an additional person or persons in an "operator" role who is not actually making the contacts." No, it's not. If you involve a
Just some factual input: The ARRL rules already make the situation for single ops very clear. 2.1.Single Operator: One person performs all transmitting, receiving, and logging functions as well as eq
You are correct in the history of this, since Skimmer was not developed when the rule was written. However, there are a few questions. 1. Was the rule made so that there would be a category for the
Well Joe, I agree with you... But it's pretty obvious from some of the discussions/flamefests that we've seen lately (and before) on this (and other) subject(s), that there are many who would DISAGRE
Joe, You are persistent if nothing else. You are 100% incorrect however. I refer you once again to the skimmer website where it lists the following as one of its features: "The extracted callsigns ar