CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] SO vs. SOA definition re Skimmer

To: cq-contest@contesting.com, k-zero-hb@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO vs. SOA definition re Skimmer
From: Duane - N9DG <n9dg@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 08:35:33 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Interesting question. If a new technology comes along that effectively reduces 
the value of packet networks is that necesarily a bad thing?? I don't know, 
just throwing the question out there..

I think the goal should be to clearly define the loaction for where the station 
actually begins and where it ends is in regard to defining where the 
information about what signals that there are to work is alowed to come from. 
Trying to selectively draw lines between different pieces of technology that 
are within the station itself are fraught with peril, and will ultimately be an 
exercise in futility. I really don’t see a problem with a SO being allowed to 
use whatever technology that they can muster within their station to compete. 
Where I do draw a line is when the information about stations to work comes in 
via means that is not via the antenna and equipment used on the band(s) of the 
competition itself, and is not also being extracted *directly* by using the 
station’s own equipment.

To me one of the key goals of radio contesting should be to encourage 
participants to build highly capable stations to better ‘work over’ and extract 
all that they can from the RF spectrum of the particular competition. It should 
*not* encourage the building of station to station data exchange networks, or 
to use frequencies or other communications methods that are outside of the 
frequencies of the competition (i.e. packet, Internet spotting networks).

BTW in the VHF world there is/was a near parallel to this whole spotting issue 
in regards to allowing rovers to use APRS to announce their locations. 
Something that which I totally appose, just for the record.

Duane
N9DG


--- On Wed, 6/4/08, K0HB <k-zero-hb@earthlink.net> wrote:

> From: K0HB <k-zero-hb@earthlink.net>
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] SO vs. SOA definition re Skimmer
> To: "Duane - N9DG" <n9dg@yahoo.com>, cq-contest@contesting.com
> Date: Wednesday, June 4, 2008, 9:54 AM
> Duane,
> 
> Your proposal spells the death of SOA, because with Skimmer
> in my station
> who needs packet?
> 
> 73, de Hans, K0HB
> Just a boy and his radio
> --
>  ><{{{{*>    http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb  
> 
> 



      
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>