On 14/03/2020 01:29, Stan Zawrotny wrote:
> <snip>
>
> We can't stop innovating. That's what ham radio is all about.
The clear and immediate danger is that we will "innovate" ham radio into
something else entirely.
Do we innovate chess tournaments by permitting computers? How about a
new Single-Player Assisted class :-)
Do we innovate ski-jumping by introducing wingsuits? -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingsuit_flying
> Many of the
> naysayers are also naysayers of the newer digital modes -- Mats
won't allow
> those dadgum FTs on his radio.
The newer digital modes are semi- or fully-automated machine-to-machine
modes - my computer processing your computer's data, and vice-versa.
There's clearly as a place for them, but please don't refer to them as
ham radio. FTx takes the ham out of ham radio.
> Where would we be if we had listened to the
> naysayers of SSB 70 years ago?
The comparison is illogical. Unlike the FTx machine-to machine modes,
all forms of phone are person-to-person - individuals communicating with
one another.
> But, just as we put SSB in a separate category from CW, I think we
need the
> no-limit category added to all contests. Giving them a place to be,
> legally, will encourage them to further innovate while separating
them from
> the naysayers and, more importantly, those who don't have the
resources to
> be so innovative.
Please see
http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-09/msg00251.html
73,
Paul EI5DI
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|