> On Remoting - If the transmitter, receiver and antennas are
> within the designated station circle then why should anyone
> care where the operator is located. Managing communication
> latencies is a technical challenge. Does it advance the
> radio art? Maybe. It might likely break down some of the
> economic barriers to building large stations. This would be
> a good thing that advances contesting and dxing. Does it
> negatively impact the value of operator skill? I think not.
Because the operator is as much a part of the station as are
the transmitters, receivers, antennas and computers. Part of
building a station in an advantaged location is being there
to operate it - not operating from somewhere else. If one is
going to have a station in KL7 during ARRL DX, one should be
in KL7 during ARRL DX <G>. If one is going to have a station
in North Dakota during RTTY Roundup, one should be in North
Dakota during RTTY Roundup.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Guy Molinari
> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 10:59 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Cheating with Technology
>
>
> I think there are a number of reasons why people get involved
> in contesting. There are those who like the technical
> aspects of station building and see contests as a way to
> "prove out" station designs, changes, etc. They get their
> kicks from the technology side of things. Another group
> likes the competition inherent in operating. They see value
> in building operating skills rather than technology for
> technologies sake.
>
> On SO2R - SO2R is about skill, not technology (this is a dead
> horse that has been beaten many times). SO2R advances the
> radio art from a skill building perspective. Managing
> interstation interference is a related technical challenge.
> This also advances the radio art.
>
> On Skimmer - Skimmer has the potential of leveling the
> playing field when used to generate spots. I think the idea
> of a network of skimmers for spotting and propagation studies
> is a good one that advances the radio art. Using skimmer in
> the single op category demeans the skills that many ops have
> worked hard to develop. These skills are not considered a
> chore to those who have worked hard to hone them. Using
> skimmer to copy calls and populate a band map does not
> advance the radio art.
>
> On Remoting - If the transmitter, receiver and antennas are
> within the designated station circle then why should anyone
> care where the operator is located. Managing communication
> latencies is a technical challenge. Does it advance the
> radio art? Maybe. It might likely break down some of the
> economic barriers to building large stations. This would be
> a good thing that advances contesting and dxing. Does it
> negatively impact the value of operator skill? I think not.
>
> These are of course just my personal opinions.
>
> I think the basic test of whether a technology should be
> allowed is the ask this question. "Does it advance the radio
> art from the perspective of the major constituencies?". I
> realize that this is somewhat subjective question. This
> seems to me to be the stewardship of the contest sponsors.
>
> Hopefully they will quickly sort this out and weigh in on skimmer.
>
> I'm a newcomer that has just gotten into contesting in the
> past few years. I wasn't an active ham before computers
> became popular, but I'm old enough to remember what it was
> like before computer technology became mainstream.
>
> My .02 cents worth.
>
> 73 - Guy, N7ZG
>
>
>
>
> > From: bparry@rgv.rr.com> To: Tom@k5rc.cc;
> cq-contest@contesting.com>
> > Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:20:07 -0500> Subject: Re:
> [CQ-Contest] Cheating with Technology> > I just don't
> understand where we are going with this. It appears that
> folks> want to pick the technology that suits them and call
> it fine. (SO2R, or> propagation software, or logging
> software, or remote stations, at al. and> call them cutting
> edge technology that improves us all. Other technology for>
> some reason is "persona non gratis" (anything having to do
> with packet is> equated with sexual assault of children).> >
> >From contest results, the EVIDENCE I see is that SO2R is a
> far more valuable> asset than packet. Virtually all the top
> scoring Single Ops use SO2R. Single> OP scores always seem
> higher than single op assisted. I don't want to do> SO2R but
> I say more power to those excellent operators that can use
> it.> > This new skimmer software seems cool to me. Maybe it
> is the final coming of> the end, I don't know. I'm not smart
> enough to see into the future, but I> think that a couple of
> problems with packet might be fixed if we used the> skimmer
> instead of individuals inputting calls into the packet
> system.> > You see, I know a secret! I am never going to win
> one of these contests. I> operate the contest because I think
> they are fun and I like to work new band> countries and old
> friends. I refuse to be told by someone I am a bad> operator
> if I miscopy too many calls or I use packet. So I choose not
> to> enter my log! I enter my log into the 3830 Reflector (in
> the proper> category). I can see how I have done. If contests
> are made into name calling> contest, lots of guys may decide
> not to participate. Should make SS on> Sunday afternoon even
> more fun!> > I think that everyone needs to step back and
> remember why we got in this> hobby. > > Bill W5VX > >
> -----Original Message-----> From:
> cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com>
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tom
> Taormina> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:09 AM> To:
> cq-contest@contesting.com> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Cheating
> with Technology> > > You forgot a big one, Dick. We cheated
> by using technology to fly to the> Moon. We should have used
> wooden boats and sails.> > Tom Taormina, K5RC> Virginia City
> Nevada> http://k5rc.cc> NACHO-W7RN RANN-K7RC> CQ Contest Hall
> of Fame, FOC 1760> > > > Message: 1> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008
> 21:13:48 -0700> From: "Dick Dievendorff"
> <dieven@comcast.net>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Get out of
> jail free card> To: <cbrakob@earthlink.net>, "'Jim George'"
> <n3bb@mindspring.com>,> "'Kelly Taylor'" <ve4xt@mts.net>,
> <wn3vaw@verizon.net>,> <cq-contest@contesting.com>>
> Message-ID: <000001c883f7$7952cf10$6bf86d30$@net>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"> > Right. While
> we're at it, we should ban those pesky memory keyers, it
> makes> redundant the important contesting skill of manually
> operating a Morse key.> > And while we're at it, get rid of
> those pesky computer logging programs, it> makes redundant
> the important contesting skill of writing legibly and>
> maintaining a dupe sheet in real time.> > And those durned
> microcontroller computers that are essential to every> modern
> transceiver should also be banned. No software power, just
> people> skills.> > Dick, K6KR> > >
> _______________________________________________> 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
> _________________________________________________________________
> Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging.
> You IM, we give.
> http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|