<snip> VE4XT has taken 8 paragraphs in support of the "do nothing" option. The point of Radiosport, for anyone who is a contender, is to win - within the rules. 73, Paul EI5DI _______________________
<snip> I asked this question already before but will gladly repeat it: What is needed for the contest committee to take actions on too wide signals? The CQWW committee took the initiative, some thre
<snip> I am intrigued by the SDR references. Are entire bands recorded throughout the contest and reviewed after? Here's an example I received from the CQWW committee, showing a recording of my sign
And this morning I was on the edge too, to family in Melbourne via Skype. However, I'll additionally be running 1A as VY1AAA -- via remote.. J has a 6KW generator, and we will have temp antennas in W
<snip> In 2015 it's crazy to expect a medium-sized station to spin the knob and operate unassisted if that station wants to have a shot at 2M or 3M. Maybe once, but not any longer. In 2015 it's crazy
Thanks to a lot of work from J and the remote team, Hal, W1NN, will operate SOHP in November SS via remote from his home in Ohio. The fact that something can be done does not necessarily mean there
Not alone as the only hobby/sport dealing with the question of how much technology is too much. All competitive activities are affected this way. New technology is often questioned when it has the p
<snip> Using Super Check Partial makes you assisted category in a contest. No - all relevant technology assists. In essence, what distinguishes "assisted" from "unassisted" is that you connect to ext
I respectfully have a different standard, Paul. In the context of radio sport, "technology" is not assistance. "Outside sourced information" is assistance. SCP is based on MASTER.DTA, a reference fi
<snip> There can be zero doubt that using SCP is using a database assembled by others. Is there really a difference in changing a callsign during the contest via use of a db as compared to changing i
Please consider the panadapter may show strong signals as wide. Most web sdr receivers show strong signals wide. That is normal. Any station 60db above the noise appears, and is, wider at the noise
I enjoy contesting, but it's a legacy that isn't going to successfully compete for attention among anything beyond a very small percentage of today's youth. Most of the young ops at Field Day or con
You're entire reply essentially says that I'm talking apples and oranges. And you're exactly right. But those apples compete for attention with our oranges among youngsters, and the apples are going
<snip> Single line score probably doesn't do much, and isn't much assistance. (Total Q's, total mults, and total score.) Full band break down seems like assistance to me. "Assisted" is a meaningless
Sorry, Ron, but I totally disagree. If it doesn't *assist* someone to watch a scoreboard without band breakdown information (and it doesn't), then it is not *assistance*. We're going round in circles
There is another option... Rather than continue to get twisted in defining the separation, we could merge SO and SOA into one and remove all confusion. There could be an overlay category for the guy
N1UR said: ....rename it - Traditional and Pro BRILLIANT!!! It's not brilliant, because if categories or overlays are renamed, they still have to be defined. Where is the boundary between Assisted a
<snip> Without overly belaboring the obvious, your success as a contester is directly proportional how fast and accurately you can fill your log with "good" exchanges. Lower accuracy = lower score.
<snip> Some contests, with a separation for these two categories, NEVER DQ ANYONE for unclaimed use of "assistance," to use the CQ terminology. Some contests, with separate categories for HP, LP and
<snip> In other words, Unassisted means you use only ham radio; assisted means you may use other forms of communications as well. Jack has summed up the issue nicely. However, the words "Assisted" an