On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 08:25, Cqtestk4xs@aol.com wrote:
> Listening to K5ZD's audio is no different from listening to him on your
> second radio if you are a SO2R guy. However, the source (Internet) is
> different,
> and that might make a difference
The difference is that your SO2R second radio is within 500m of the rest
of your station. I *do* believe that using the K5ZD live audio at a
single-op-unassisted station is against the rules.
At a multiop, (or SO-assisted) IMHO it becomes a bit of a gray area. Is
it a form of spotting? (which would be permissible) Or is it a
receiver off the station premises? (which isn't) Looks like an area
where the technology has gotten ahead of the rules.
> As for "breaking the rules"....nope. Randy is in the clear.
Absolutely.
It is possible *someone else* could break the rules by misusing the
information Randy is offering.
It is possible someone could use the score reports posted on ARRL.org to
determine someone's section without copying it on the air. It is
possible someone could look me up on QRZ.com if he didn't copy my name
in Sprint.
Stuff happens. People cheat. It's not like we're handing out $5,000
prizes for winning CQ WW. If we hold back on technologies that might be
fun for some entrants -- that might even attract new entrants -- just
because someone, somewhere might use them to cheat -- then I think we're
being counter-productive.
Don't know if I'll have my real-time scoring system working for CQ WW
this weekend. (it'll be a very part-time effort in any case) If I do,
I sure won't be having any ethical worries about it.
--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|