At 09:00 AM 5/10/1999 -0400, Bill Fisher - W4AN wrote:
>
>What would happen if I wrote a very sophisticated robot that was able to
>use a 3rd radio while I was operating SOAB? The robot would scan the
>bands and work anyone it could find. What if this robot was so good that
>it dramatically increased my score to the point that I won the contest?
>
>I ask you... In this scenario would I be the better operator? Is the
>contest a better contest because of this technology? How is the robot any
>different from SCP technology?
>
>I am the biggest backer of technology based contesting. Technology that
>the operator takes advantage of, and in so doing becomes a better
>operator. I am not in favor of any technology that replaces the operator.
I think we need to define what is the essence of a human operator, and draw
the line before that line is breached. The robot Bill describes is clearly
out of bounds, because it entirely replaces the human. The memory keyer,
while pretty far from the line in the other direction, does replace *some
aspects* of the human operator.
As always, hard cases make bad law, and SCP is a good example of pushing
the envelope. I can go either way, and it might even be interesting to try
changing the rules of one or more established contests to outlaw the
technique, just to see what that does to scores, error rates, etc.
Alternatively, one might permit SCP as long as it's based on one's own
logs, not those of other people. There are lots of variations, but unless
and until a rule is made, it's hard to argue why one shouldn't use what the
rules permit.
73, Pete N4ZR
Loud is good
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|