Actually, I don't think I'd drop out. It would be a rare occasion when I
actually win anything (except in the VHF+ contests) so I'll just keep
playing the game my way and have fun and let everyone else do their thing.
But beware - I might even send out paper QSL's.
:-)
73, Zack W9SZ
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 6:55 PM, David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>wrote:
>
> Yeah, for sure, but I doubt that would be a big enough reason for you to
> drop out of radiosport.
>
> To be honest (and I'm answering you off the reflector), I also think that
> it takes much less skill to point/click a cluster spot and make a contact
> without ever needing to copy the other guy's callsign. I just don't agree
> with the guys who classify everyone who uses the cluster as being a "lesser
> operator". A different operator ... yes. A lesser operator ... not
> necessarily.
>
> And for sure it takes potentially zero operating skill to make a robotic
> QSO, but it clearly takes a lot of technical skill to do so and there are
> apparently hams who are drawn to competing in that aspect of the game. As
> long as they can transparently play on the same battlefield as the rest of
> us, and as long as we aren't required to directly compete against them,
> where is the harm? Or the dishonor?
>
> I just think that too many folks are treating differences as if they were a
> threat of some sort. I can't possibly hope to compete with an antenna farm
> like that at W7WW, and if I operated with low power or QRP I wouldn't be
> able to compete with an equivalent station running high power (I've done
> both), yet we readily accept that all of them can coexist in the same event.
> Why should the appearance of robotic stations change that? I always
> thought that one of the values of ham radio was its diversity, but
> apparently not everyone sees it that way.
>
> 73,
> Dave AB7E
>
> p.s. I tend to lose track of connecting names with callsigns during the
> heat of battle in a contest, but I'll try to remember to send a "Hi Zack" if
> I hear you. ;)
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4/18/2010 4:18 PM, Zack Widup wrote:
>
>> A lot of times in addition to the QSO info I will send "Hi Dave" or
>> whatever
>> the op's name is. I'll get a "Hi Zack" back about 80% of the time. I know
>> I'm not going to get that from a robot.
>> :-)
>>
>> 73, Zack W9SZ
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 12:42 PM, David Gilbert<xdavid@cis-broadband.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> How would you even know whether you were working a robot or not
>>> (assuming it was properly implemented)? And if you can't tell the
>>> difference, why would you care (assuming you were in a separate entry
>>> category)?
>>>
>>> Dave AB7E
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/18/2010 8:24 AM, Zack Widup wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I'm waiting for the day when robots make all the QSO's in a contest. I
>>>>
>>>>
>>> see
>>>
>>>
>>>> that as useless and that would be the day when I gave up. As of now, it
>>>> seems one's score would be the result of four things - operating skill,
>>>>
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>
>>>> quality of one's station, location and band conditions. Where's the
>>>> operating skill in having a robot doing it? I suppose there may be some
>>>> skill in writing a program that works, but that's not operating skill.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> And I
>>>
>>>
>>>> still like to think I'm working a real person at the other end.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|