[CQ-Contest] When is a QSO not a QSO?
n5ot at n5ot.com
Wed Mar 21 05:12:38 EST 2007
This is a spirited conversation!
> If you feel that way then the operator in Ontario is superfluous.
Paul, you're putting words in my mouth. Certainly the idea of a fully
automated station capable of working contestants at a credible rate has been
brought up before. However, today's conversation started because some real
human beings are looking for a solution to their current home station blues.
Therefore the conversation is centered very much on having live operators
controlling these stations. Automation is getting off the subject.
> A remote station set up to automatically reply to your callsign
> interogation would suffice would it not?
Since you've asked, I personally have no problem with this, but it's not
what the conversation is about - it's about frustrated people looking for
solutions. The question is "should the operator be required to be at the
radio equipment?" and some are saying "no" and some are saying "yes."
To state my position clearly:
1. I don't think the op has to be in the same location as the radio gear.
2. I don't care how far away the op is from the radio gear.
3. The QSO is with wherever the radio equipment is located, regardless of
where the op is located.
4. No rules changes or category additions are needed to allow any of this.
More information about the CQ-Contest