I can see we're getting near the end of this thread. You say Black, I say White. You say we should only consider the number of ops, I say we should consider the whole picture. I don't think either on
It simply DOES NOT MATTER whether you like it or not - if you don?t like it, don't use it. The rules do not prohibit technology or we would not have memory keyers, computer logging, history files an
You are completely correct in your assessment, Tonno. Anyone who has done contesting seriously knows that packet increases the score on average. There now are some very skilled "assisted" operators b
Not strictly true! Take the 2007 CQWW rules as an example (http://www.cqww.com/2007_rules_cqww.pdf)... Section III.A.1 Single Operator High: Those stations at which _one_ _person_ performs all of the
Hi Joe, well, you are wrong. It matters whether contesters like it and that is the only thing that matters. We are not making money in contesting and it has to be maximum fun for majority. If the pac
ES5TV: they participate in non-assisted class because that is were you get real credit for what you have done in terms of developing your skills and building your stations. The milestones in building
Thanks Tonno. I didn't go back and figure out how to measure it, but I have been wondering how much weight to give to the position of someone who is not a fellow competitor? I'm more inclined to pay
"Your point has been made clear long ago so please let it go now and let's rather hear the opionions of those contesters who haven't yet spoken. 73 tonno es5tv" Well this contester happens to agree 1
WC1M said about skimming: Which contest/rule are you referring to? 73, VR2/KBrett7Graham/p. _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://li
I'm referring to the ARRL rules for HF Contesting. The relevant rule is: "2.1.1.Use of spotting assistance or nets (operating arrangements involving other individuals, DX-alerting nets, packet, Inter
Dick, I believe the phrase does include things "like local Skimmer" and the "etc" drives it home. To me the definition clearly includes Skimmer. Mark, N5OT ___________________________________________
Dick, I agree with Mark and others on this. I believe the intent of the rule was that the single operator would tune his radio to find stations to work. The source that would provide a list of statio
WC1M answered KB7G questioning which current contest/rule he said did not prohibit SOs from skimming: Ah ha, I get it: "Use of A or B (followed by a list things) is not permitted" Does not mean: "Use
I don't want to get too deeply into any more Skimmer conversations on this reflector because I've already gotten in too deep! I'll just say I don't disagree about the intent of the rule, and I can se
Great analysis, Brett! You are exactly correct. The rules are clear, however it seems there is a desire among some to either use the correct reading of what is written OR twist it into something it d
Dick, Skimmer does not seem to introduce anything new into this situation. The same anomaly has existed since the introduction of the assisted category. Currently the rules would allow an assisted or
Why would et cetera drive anything home? From Strunk & White's The Elements of Styles: V. WORDS AND EXPRESSIONS COMMONLY MISUSED "Etc. Not to be used of persons. Equivalent to and the rest, and so fo
Good analysis of the problem. However, Skimmer does introduce something new and that is the ability for someone have that "good heart" and spot all the stations calling in the pile-up without having
Given that these rules have existed for a considerable period of time, which is a more reasonable expectation: A) That the authors of the ARRL rules intended the phrase "...spotting assistance or net
I can't answer for whether the writer of the rule used the correct elements of style. However, dictionaries define the word "etcetera" as: "a number of other things or persons unspecified." Since Sk