[CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer

[Pete Smith]

>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
>[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>rt_clay at bellsouth.net
>Sent: April-24-08 9:37 AM
>To: cq-contest at contesting.com
>Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer
>
>
> > Using Skimmer would not be cheating, but it clearly is assistance.
> >
> > The CQWW rules are quite clear when it says "The use of DX alerting
> > assistance of any kind places the station in the Single Operator
> > Assisted Category".
> >
> > It does not specify that the assistance has to come from another "person".
>
>Bogus argument.
>
>If I park a 2nd receiver on another band while calling cq on band #1
>(standard
>SO2R) that clearly gives me  "DX alerting assistance" of  another kind as
>well.
>
>They clearly mean from other operators.

Further to the same point - when the CQWW rule was written, I think we can 
be confident that nobody considered the arrival of Skimmer technology on 
the contesting scene.  In the early 20th century, it was law in some places 
that an automobile had to be preceded on the road by a man with a red flag, 
so that horses would not be startled.  Want to try to apply that today, on 
I-95?

73, Pete N4ZR