[CQ-Contest] Re: Contest IMing

Bob Naumann - N5NJ n5nj at gte.net
Thu Feb 19 11:17:02 EST 2004

Being assisted, whether by ham radio means or by IM, is assisted in my book.  Single ops should not use this.  For those who are assisted, or multi-ops, I see no difference in this or any other cluster, or net arrangement.

The area that is blurred, is the distinction between amateur and non-amateur "means".  I haven't used RF to connect to a cluster in years.  Is that in violation of using non-amateur means?

From: sawyered at earthlink.net
Date: 2004/02/19 Thu AM 10:37:07 CST
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Re: Contest IMing

Hard to imagine how the rules will cover this topic.  The concept of unassisted operating is really getting blurred on this concept.  Is the thought that IMing will also be considered "assisted"?  Is the thought that the contest organizers who can't seem to bring themselves to DQing self spotters are somehow going to regulate live IM chatting going on real time with windows that close and leave no trace.

Its probably going on now in fact.  The old question of how much "power" is legal into multiple monoband yagiis has been replaced with what is the definition of a "spotting network" or "packet".  Me and my buddies all in the same IM window as someone says "hey, 10M is open to JA" isn't a spotting network is it?

I used to be against it, but, with the internet development of "tools" like this and the blatent lack of enforcement by contest sponsors of self spotting, I am in favor of changing all of it to....just make sure you work the guy, don't care how you found 'em or how he found you...just work 'em and move on.  Unassisted vs. Assisted is really becoming a joke.

Ed  N1UR
    The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!

CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list