I agree with you in many aspects, Hank. My comments were clear that they
applied to CW and SSB only, not to RTTY where the machine decoding is
essential. In fact, RTTY is the ideal category to move ahead into
machine-enabled receiving and Skimming and automatic responding.
As far as CW is concerned, I also agree that CW readers allow people with
no, or limited, CW copying ability to take part. That is good, as it brings
more participation, and encourages more people into CW at a minimum. Some
may go on to high levels of CW proficiency. However I get concerned when we
"fast forward" to the next step, where one's own receiver populates a band
map. Technically, this is a clear S/O capability as neither packet nor any
other assistance was obtained. It's clear that if Skimming technology
proves to be as effective as the potential suggests, then Skimming will be
required to be competitive in CW contesting. One can argue that this is
akin to SO2R in the sense it's required to be competitive. That would be
correct.
Then take it one step further, and the software is advanced to *call* these
stations automatically and make machine-to-machine contacts, unassisted in
any way by a human operator. This is a bad forward trajectory in my
opinion. It takes CW contesting, at least, to robotics. If we want to allow
robotically operated CW (or longer term, SSB) contests to be the way of the
future, then we need take no additional restrictions and allow the
technology to move on. Define "assisted" to involve anything from other
people, and "unassisted" to allow any and all machine enhancements as long
as no other people are involved. It's a valid policy issue, and it is coming.
"Machine assistance" is tricky, as there are a long list of terrific
technology improvements which have made contesting more efficient and more
enjoyable. I try to take advantage of these here and do not resist them at
all. However if the technology moves us to the point where "machine
assistance/efficiency" takes the operator out of the loop in an essential
way, we have to take a hard look at it. Like Tree recently said so well, at
that point, perhaps the sport has passed some of us by. One of those
probably would be me.
We surely do live in interesting times!
73, Jim N3BB
Jim
At 02:12 PM 3/22/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>At 05:04 AM 22 03 2008, Jim George, N3BB wrote:
>
> >I contend the capability to pick out (basically) all the signals on a band
> >with a wide IF and software and then display these data for either a human
> >to click on them and call them, or a robot to do the same, will kill the
> >hobby.
>
>I have a different perspective. I'm CW contester to the
>core. Although a little pistol, there are few things I enjoy more
>than a CW contest.
>
>Last night, as I played in the BARTG RTTY contest, I realized that I
>had run 35 stations in 30 minutes using only the mouse. My hands
>never went to the VFO or keyboard. All I did was click on calls,
>click on exchanges. It was neat and it was a blast. If I had been
>assisted or had Skimmer, I could have worked S&P by clicking on the
>band map, again never touching VFO or keyboard. Yee Haw! It wasn't
>CW contesting, but it was fun and had its own appeal. This kind of
>technology and fun can bring new operators to CW contests.
>
>Fast forward six months. If mature Skimmer technology allows hams
>who can't copy CW or can't copy 30 WPM CW to have the same kind of
>blast I had last night AND to work me in Sweepstakes, Bravo! I don't
>think it is going to "kill the hobby." It may change the hobby, but
>I've seen a lot of change in fifty-two years of hamming, and I enjoy
>contests just as much now as I did back then.
>
>I don't know if I'll use Skimmer, and I'll leave it to others to
>decide if Skimmer should place an operator in assisted or some other
>category. Just don't try to outlaw it. It could be a very good
>thing for CW contesting: more stations to work and more contacts for everyone.
>
>
>73,
>
>Hank, W6SX
>
>Mammoth Lakes, California
>
>Elevation 8083 feet in John Muir's Range of Light
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|