[CQ-Contest] When is a QSO not a QSO?

[Paul J. Piercey]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mark Beckwith
> Sent: March 20, 2007 13:16
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] When is a QSO not a QSO?
> 
> Paul #1 said:
> 
> >> My point is that when I make contact with a station, even in a 
> >> contest, it's the operator that I am working, not the equipment.
> 
> Paul #2 replied:
> 
> > Paul is right. Amateur radio, and contesting in particular, is a 
> > point-to-point (single-point to single-point), person- to-person, 
> > solely-RF-based technology.
> 
> You're losing me, Paul #2, when you say point-to-point, in 
> the case of a VE3 remotely using a station in KH6, is his 
> point in Hawaii or Canada?  I don't see why this is such a 
> big deal.  I think the point on that end of the QSO is 
> obviously in Hawaii.

If you feel that way then the operator in Ontario is superfluous. A remote
station set up to automatically reply to your callsign interogation would
suffice would it not?

> 
> When you say "point-to-point (single-point to single-point), 
> person-to-person, solely-RF-based technology", are you 
> therefore saying that because this station has two possible 
> points that it should not be allowed to be a part of the 
> sport?  That seems counter-productive.
> 
> Mark, N5OT 
> 

I think I stated my case quite clearly above as you denoted (me as Paul #1).

When I contact N5OT, I contact "you" because of where "you" are; not where
you say you are or where your radio is. If I want to work a guy in N5, then
I'd just call you. If I want to work a P5, I want to work a guy that is
actually in P5. If you say you're in P5, but you are actually sitting in N5,
then I haven't really worked a guy in P5. I just worked a guy in N5 using a
radio in P5. You wouldn't be able to tell me anything about the P5 locale
you were pretending to be in. This is my point.

(Sidenote #1: I realize that in a contest there's not a lot of chit-chat but
hopefully you catch my drift.)

(Sidenote #2: Maybe this would be a good way to get P5 back on the air. A
remote station could be set up that could only be operated by foreigners who
can't divulge any of the current happenings in North Korea nor subvert the
locals because they aren't really there. Hmmmm.)

Again, I will state that I am not against the technology. I am against its
use to create the illusion of "working the world" when all I am doing is
working some guy "down the street". That's what telephones are for.

73 -- Paul VO1HE