[CQ-Contest] Again?

[Bob Naumann - N5NJ]

Dick,

The clear distinction is that with packet, you have involved other operators with you which then means that you are no longer single-operator.

All of the other things that are part of a SO2R set up are things you, as a single operator control and use.

This distinction is why there are other categories for packet use that are properly named such as:

Single-Op Plus Packet
Single-Op Plus Net
Single-Op Assisted
etc.

Those contests that do not draw a distinction between packet use and single op, have essentially changed to a Single-Op Assisted only.  There is no category for single operator in those contests any longer.  I believe that the WAE is this way now.

73,
Bob
N5NJ




> 
> From: "Richard Zalewski" <w7zr at citlink.net>
> Date: 2003/01/24 Fri PM 03:44:19 EST
> To: <BobK8IA at aol.com>,  <w4pa at yahoo.com>,  <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Again?
> 
> "Hats off to those that have the ability to use any legitimate technology to
>  able them to compete at a higher level."
> 
> Packet radio is a legitimate technology yet most contests put use of that
> technology
> into a separate class.
> 
> Dick W7ZR
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <BobK8IA at aol.com>
> To: <w4pa at yahoo.com>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 1:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Again?
> 
> 
> > In a message dated 1/24/2003 1:17:11 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> > w4pa at yahoo.com writes:
> >
> >
> > > Let me make sure I understand you correctly:  SO2R operation was
> > > developed from the existing rule set, and now those same rules
> > > years later are "grossly unfair" to the SO1R contest participant?
> > >
> > > We should change the rules to inhibit competitive operating
> > > practices, developed within those same rules, when the raison d'etre
> > > of radio contesting is just that: to develop operator ability?
> > >
> > > Twilight zone, man, twilight zone.
> > >
> > > Scott Robbins, W4PA
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Hi Scott;
> >
> > Was SO2R really "developed" from an existing tules set or did it simply
> > evolve via technology and rules interpretation? I can recall big time
> SSers
> > W4KFC and W9IOP in the 50s operating what now would be called SO2R. The
> > technology was just different then.
> >
> > Hats off to those that have the ability to use any legitimate technology
> to
> > able them to compete at a higher level. I doubt I could do a effective
> SO2R
> > thing, even if I had the system for it. But I sure admire those that can!
> >
> > 73,Bob K8IA
> > Mesa, Arizona USA
> > near the Superstition Mtns
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>