First off, I think Skimmer is extremely cool technology. I think it has
the potential to draw new (probably causal) participants into
contesting, and I think it might help DXpeditions or rare DX run pileups
more effectively. If nothing else, I will almost certainly buy a copy
of Skimmer for my own use to track and review band openings (assuming
they ever come back) for propagation studies. I hope Skimmer continues
to develop and I hope it spawns lots of offshoots.
I think an important point is being missed in this discussion, though.
Skimmer facilitates unattended operation. Whether you're running
Skimmer on the mults rig for SO2R or leaving the shack entirely for a
ten minute break, Skimmer keeps doing at least part of your job without
you even participating. How is that not assisted? How is that
materially different from periodically monitoring a spotting cluster?
Yes, we have SCP, and we have code readers, and we have memory keyers,
and we have logging programs, etc. But Skimmer doesn't simply make you
(potentially) more efficient as an operator ... it takes over for you
when you aren't there. Enforceability is an irrelevant issue since we
already have several rules (power level, phantom ops, etc) that can't be
verified, but it seems to me that using Skimmer would ethically put you
into an assisted or multi-op category.
As an aside, I find it ironic that some of the most vocal opponents of
remotely controlled stations (where a real-time operator must still be
directly involved) seem to think Skimmer (which keeps doing it's job
even when you aren't) is merely a proficiency improvement.
73,
Dave AB7E
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|