[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer

To: "Rudy Bakalov" <r_bakalov@yahoo.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer
From: "Stan Stockton" <k5go@cox.net>
Reply-to: Stan Stockton <k5go@cox.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:53:32 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
 Rudy N2WQ Wrote:
>  As long as it is not robots making 
> the QSO and station 
> transmitter/receiver are not scattered 
> across the globe, let the humans use 
> as much technology as they can.

Now we have something to talk about.... 
How do you propose eliminating that 
next, rather easy step up from Skimmer - 
Robotic Automated QSO machines?

It is refreshing to find that seemingly 
someone who is questioning whether there 
should be a category to differentiate 
between someone who is working the 
contest with his own skills versus using 
a computer to tell him what stations are 
active, what frequency they are 
operating on, what they are sending, 
etc. would perhaps  want to draw a line 
in the sand before the whole thing is 
turned into a computer game...

I assumed everyone who wanted to allow 
Skimmer in the unassisted category or 
wanted to diminish the whole sport by 
eliminating the number one category of 
entry would also welcome the next 
logical step which would be to replace 
the operator with machines to 
automatically make the QSOs and log them 
for you.

Stan, K5GO 

CQ-Contest mailing list

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