[CQ-Contest] CW/SSB/PSK31...

[Chuck]

This debate is like others along the same lines..
Both have dedicated camps of followers who have
passionate (and usually well-reasoned) points of
view and positions staked out. Neither will budge
(much) off their positions.

(An aside.. kinda reminds me of the Kipling poem
about the 7 blind men touching different parts of
an elephant and THEN describing the elephant.
Each was right, passionate, and accurate... but
they all lacked an overall contextual point of
reference.)

After having followed the 'CW/NO CW',
'CW/SSB/PSK/etc' debates.. one theme seems to be
constantly appearing - at least to my eyes.

The BIG difference between the two camps is the
level of human involvment in the effort to
successfully initiate, follow through on, and
complete the communications.

CW/SSB operations (without intervening
decisionmaking technology involved) INHERENTLY
make the human being an integral part of the
equation. You CAN'T do it without the human
being. 

It REQUIRES a buy-in and a committment to
participate which axiomatically brings ownership
(with the subsequenct personal pleasure of
succeeding in doing) to the entire process.

Ownership involves investment and that requires
one to comitt to the investment which invokes a
personal comittment by the one who is invested in
he process.   

The decision on 'go/no-go' and success/failure of
the mission is totally dependent on the decisions
made by the human being which further cement the
relationship and make that bond even tighter and
more personal.

In the case of technology driven modes such as
PSK/RTTY/etc. where the machine makes the
'go/no-go', 'success/failure' determination and
decision the human being is reduced to a lesser
role not having any real stake or buy-in to the
success or failure of the mission outcome.  

The amount of commitment/involvement/investment
of self is reduced (or depending on the level of
automation/technology involved) basically
eliminated and therefore no real sense of
achievement or satisfaction.  

If the mission succeeds, it is due to the machine
being the primary source of success.. if it
fails.. then the machine is responsible. All the
human did was tune a knob and press a
button/click a mouse and stand back out of the
way.

The success/failure is dependent on a 'thing' not
a person and that drives the value to the human
down to where it becomes just a commodity to be
used rather than something to invest in.

No personal connection.. no buy-in.. no
investment of self into the project.. little
comittment... therefore little pleasure in
success or desire to findout why things failed.

I AM NOT.. ANTIDIGITAL/AUTOMATED MODES! I believe
firmly that digital modes and all the wonderful
benefits have their place, surely. Let us use
them for their best purposes, of course. However,
I think we should try to keep the understanding
of WHY in mind whichwill help eliminate the
constant aruging about 'MY MODE'S BETTER'N YOUR
MODE BECAUSE....' OH YEAH! WELL *MY* MODE CAN
DO...."..etc..etc..

Just one hams humble and perhaps misguided
understanding.

Fingers are twitching!@ MUST BE TIME FOR A
CONTEST!

73
Chuck K3FT

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com