I think the simple answer for any new or future contester is to contest the
contest organizers directly with contest specific questions.
I have found that all are more than happy to help and provide a clear concise
answer to even the simplest query.
Although, it is nice to have this resource, and friends, to ponder the various
rules, the contest sponsor's answer is the only factual one that matters.
73,
Julius Fazekas
N2WN
Tennessee Contest Group
http://www.k4ro.net/tcg/index.html
http://groups.google.com/group/tcg1?hl=en
Tennessee QSO Party
http://www.tnqp.org/
Elecraft K2 #4455
Elecraft K3/100 #366
Elecraft K3/100 #1875
--- On Mon, 5/31/10, kr2q@optimum.net <kr2q@optimum.net> wrote:
> From: kr2q@optimum.net <kr2q@optimum.net>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Use of CW decoders in contests - NO, IT IS NOT "SIMPLE"
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Date: Monday, May 31, 2010, 8:02 PM
> Hans said:
> [snip]
> It's really quite simple, isn't it.
>
> Whatever TECHNOLOGY that you use INSIDE your station during
> the contest
> period should be allowed in the "unassisted"
> category. This specifically
> would allow decoders, "panoramic scopes", LOCAL
> skimmer-like technology,
> etc.
> [end snip]
>
> Hans, I wish you would more clearly state this as YOUR
> OPINION, since Skimmer and Skimmer-
> Like technology is specifically prohibited from the
> Single-Op category in many contests,
> including the BIGGEST of them all.
>
> We have folks on here asking things like: What does "USA
> SO(A)AB(TS) HP" mean, so we have
> a fair number of novice or even potential contesters in the
> audience.
>
> The LAST thing we need is opinion being couched as if it
> were fact.
>
> I know that you used the word "should," but lots of folks
> will not read that subtle nuance of
> language into your statement.
>
> I will never argument your right to your OPINION, but
> PLEASE be careful to define it as such.
> It is REALLY HARD to ensure that contesters enter the
> correct category of entry (EG: "what is
> assisted?") without potentially misleading statements being
> posted here.
>
> Thanks for everyone's consideration of this when making
> sweeping-statements which are
> actually opinion.
>
> de Doug KR2Q
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|