Who gets the credit for the win? I vote for the programmer.
73, Mike NF4L
On Jul 22, 2014, at 2:02 AM, <somata90924@mypacks.net>
<somata90924@mypacks.net> wrote:
> Why dont we have a contest completely run by software?
>
> cool huh? Next we could have a entry for ROBOTS okey?
>
> '''''What Hath God Wroght?'''''
>
> Joe w6vnr
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Tom Osborne <w7why@frontier.com>
>> Sent: Jun 24, 2014 5:59 PM
>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Comments on CQWW Rules
>>
>> How about letting the software figure it out.
>>
>> Enter all your information, antenna, power, HFTA info, etc, into the
>> logging program and then have it all interfaced with some propagation
>> software.
>>
>> You could then click on a skimmer spot, the computer would compute the
>> probability that you could work this station, and if it is higher, than
>> say, 80 percent probable you could, just go ahead and log it and look
>> for another skimmer spot.
>>
>> Sure would save a lot of frustration having to actually listen to
>> stations to have to figure what their call is and wait for them to ID. 73
>>
>> Tom W7WHY
>>
>>
>> On 6/24/2014 9:55 AM, Barry wrote:
>>> I propose the term S & P be updated to our modern world. It's time to
>>> call it C & P (click and pounce). Does anyone really Search any more?
>>>
>>> Barry W2UP
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|