CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Random acts of kindness, Unassisted Categories,Rules, e

To: Ken Widelitz <widelitz@gte.net>, cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Random acts of kindness, Unassisted Categories,Rules, etc.
From: Tree <tree@kkn.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 17:53:29 -0800
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 05:08:23PM -0800, Ken Widelitz wrote:

> Technological innovation is inevitable. It won't be too long before your
> bandscope shows the callsigns of every station on the band. Will that make
> you "unassisted?"

This is an interesting question.  About 20 years ago, I produced the "Z80 Op"
that could make QSOs on its own.  Is that an operator? 

One thing is for sure - as technology improves, the "art of contesting" will
have to figure out how it wants to deal with it.  I feel that if the 
operator is removed too much from the equation - that it will no longer have
the appeal it has to many of us.  There is probably a good hunting analogy 
to help illustrate my point.

> Clearly, this ("random acts of kindness") is a slippery slope with no
> possible resolution of enforcement, unless the entire HF spectrum is
> recorded during the contest and a large squad of referees listens to each
> competitive station's entire effort, which just ain't gonna happen. OTOH,
> the log checking capacity is currently such that someone using packet and
> submitting unassisted will be caught.

There are many things that fit into this category.  You can run lots of power
and not get caught.

> If the rules are changed to specifically prohibit acting on "random acts of
> kindness" they will be unenforceable, but in such circumstances I would have
> to ignore the random act of kindness. In the "fairness" example you gave
> where one station stops CQing to find a needed mult and the other station
> gets a "random act of kindness" my only response is that the operative word
> is "RANDOM."

The rules about receiving assistance in spotting seem pretty clear to me.  

So Ken - maybe I have been shouting too much and I missed what you have been 
saying?

Do we agree that:

1. If you are asking where to find the VY1.
2. Someone comes along and tells you were to find it.
3. You go off and work the VY1.

That this is assistance?

Maybe the debate is shifting to what happens when #2 happens totally at random 
without #1 taking place?  If so - I agree that is pretty rare and random.

Let's put that case to bed and not worry about it.  I am more concerned with 
stations who seem to think that #1 and #2 together don't add up to assistance
in spotting.

Tree
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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