CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] [cq-contest] Golden Goose redux...

To: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] [cq-contest] Golden Goose redux...
From: Dave Lawley <dave@g4buo.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 15:25:21 +0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Mike W0MU asks "Isn't the internet just another tool in the tool box?"
and Ray ND8L says "packet is nothing more than ANOTHER "relevant
technology assist.""

Let's consider this. In the next CQWW I decide to enter as single
operator. I operate the rig/PC myself, and I make all the QSOs. But in
the next room to the shack I set up six radios connected to some receive
antennas, and invite six of my pals to come over and tune the radios
during the contest. Every time they find something they think might be
of interest to me, most likely as a multiplier, they write the callsign,
time and frequency down on a piece of paper and come into the shack and
put it onto a pile in front of me.

That's very similar to what happens with DX Cluster, except that far
more than six people are feeding me information! The key point is that
it is *other operators* who are contributing to my score. It is not just
another piece of technology like a memory keyer, it is other people,
during the contest, contributing to the 'single op' entry. That is why,
wisely, the CQWW Committee made a distinction between unassisted and
assisted many years ago when packet cluster started to be used. We have
still not heard a convincing reason to give up that distinction now.

73, Dave G4BUO

Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>