Hi Hank:
I disagree. I believe that "Assisted" is about HELP from other operators, not
technology. Whether it's the internet, 2-meter voice spotting networks,
packet using a TNC, telephones, other operators in the shack finding
QSO's and multipliers, or psychics providing information on
the NL or WTX multipliers! :-)
It isn't the technology, it's the ASSISTANCE! The other examples you
cite are about technology.
73,
Mark, KD4D
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Hank Greeb <n8xx@arrl.org>
> I personally think that the distinction of Single Operator and Assisted
> is an anachronism of the 20th century, if not the 19th century. Why
> don't we have separate categories for folks who operate SO2R, or those
> who use computers for logging, and sending CW and Phone content? They
> are getting assistance from technology - hardly anyone would have
> thought to operate SO2R in the 50's when I got my license, and computer
> logging, sending, tracking of antennae, etc., are no different that
> using a spotting network.
>
> We should have categories for
>
> Operators who build their own equipment from scratch. This would
> include all the antenna hardware, including, perhaps, winding their own
> rotor motors, and fabricating their own towers, if needed.
>
> Operators who use superhet receivers - after all, superhets weren't in
> use when contesting first started.
>
> I could go on and on. But, my question is "why do we disallow some
> forms of technological advances in contesting, but allow many, many,
> many others?" Or, do we equate the help from a "person" to the help one
> gets from a stupid computer interfaced to the internet?
>
> 73 de n8xx Hg
>
> PAUL PIERCEY <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com> wrote:
> > Message: 4
> > Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 19:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: PAUL PIERCEY <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Assistance & Entry Status
> > To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> > Message-ID: <877554.82707.qm@web88107.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >
> > I disagree. If there is no provision in the rules governing the use of the
> cluster or "assistance" per se, then there would be no expectation that a
> single
> operator would enter as a multi-op as a matter of conscience. If the rules
> can't
> be followed then where does that leave us?
> >
> >
> > 73 -- Paul VO1HE
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|