On Mar 13, 2008, at 12:00 AM, Colleen Brakob wrote:
>
> Put into my thoughts into another frame of reference, I tend to
> consider
> the essence of a single-operator contest effort to consist of two
> "buckets"
> of "stuff".
>
> Bucket #1 is station/radio/antenna farm/log-keeping "stuff". Anything
> thing in this bucket within the law (power output, band limits,
> etc) ought
> otherwise be free of regulation. If you use 1 radio or a dozen radios
> should be simply a matter of personal choice and the skills I can
> develop
> in that regard. Any techonology/software/hardware WITHIN THE
> BOUNDARIES OF
> YOUR STATION which puts signals on the air, or brings a signal to
> your ears
> for interpretation and transcription into a log (wooden or mechanical
> pencil, computer, or chiseled into stone tablets) is fair game.
>
> Bucket #2 contains "information" which ultimately translates into Q's
> completed. In my view (emphasis on "my") the only information in this
> bucket should be that which is gleaned "off the air" by the single
> person
> operating the station. As long as the information in that bucket
> remains
> un-polluted by outside assistance (such as packet, K5ZD
> "super-check-partial" cheat sheets, auto-populated exchange elements,
> etc.), then the log qualifies as a "single-operator, un-assisted
> entry",
> regardless of the technology contained in Bucket #1.
>
Tools such as Skimmer do introduce a real conundrum into the CW
world. In fact, we will get to the point where a person can hope to
compete in a CW class without knowing CW. I have a friend who is
doing DXCC using a CW program. I've tried his program, and the only
place it has trouble is with some of the straight key folks with a
really bad fist. The basic engine looks very similar to Skimmer.
Point is, the waters are being muddied regarding CW, and there isn't
a whole lot that can be done about it. Technology is going to allow
the unlearned to compete, and will probably put a big dent in packet
at the same time. I'm trying to imagine an enforcement scheme that
doesn't involve actually sending a "contest marshall" to every
participants station to ensure compliance if we try to outlaw some of
this technology.
Your definition is pretty good, although I would have to say that
your tagline might need updated......
A boy and his radio and his computer....
-73 de Mike N3LI -
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|