[CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings

[Guy Molinari]

> NQ3X writes:
> Given past experience with this list, this 'debate' will continue ad > nauseum, saying everything and signifying nothing, until it just dies > without solving anything, without accomplishing anything except a > certain amount of catharsis for participants (guilty!). I must admit > I've been deleting most of the posts for days, because I have a low > tolerance for pedantry and reaction instead of reasoned response.
 
I suspect you haven't read the e-mails.   I think the debate has been 
rather thoughtful and healthy for the sport.   If I didn't, I would probably
opt out of the mailing list.   A choice open to all of us.
 
> aid: To help or furnish with help, support, or relief. n.> 1. The act or result of helping; assistance.> 2. An assistant or helper.> 3. A device that assists.> > as·sist:> verb (used with object)> 1. to give support or aid to; help: Please assist him in moving the > furniture.> 2. to be associated with as an assistant or helper.> –verb (used without object)
And this statement isn't pedantic?
 
> Frankly, I find the whole argument smacks of people railing against a > technology which they fear in no small way; perhaps it threatens to make > their CW skills - and by extension they themselves - obsolete. Talk > about refusing a paradigm! Aren't we supposed to be advancing the radio > art? Yeah, let's just slam the door on this potentially powerful new > technology before we make an effort to integrate it into individual > contesting strategy and technique.
It really depends upon your definition of the radio art.   Some define this as
technology as an end in itself.   Others view this as a sport where operator
skill development is paramount.   The consensus seems to be that allowing
skimmer in the unassisted category does not advance the art and sport of 
radio.   Why, because the technology is not about automating a process 
that a single op cannot do.  Namely, copy signals outside of the receiver
passband.   There has been a debate about SO2R as well.   This IMHO is
a technological advancement that advances the radio art.   Why?  Because
it raises the bar in terms of operating skill.   There is no double standard here.
 
If you take this at face value, you will see that this is not about fear.   No 
one is suggesting a ban of skimmer.   Just that it be placed in the 
appropriate category per the essence and spirit of the definition of assistance
as currently written.   
 
I like the technology quite frankly.  I believe that a skimmer network will 
increase the number of QSO's overall due to the fact that EVERYONE will be
spotted (cheerleading becomes irrelevant). 73 - Guy, N7ZG
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself wherever you are. Mobilize!
http://www.gowindowslive.com/Mobile/Landing/Messenger/Default.aspx?Locale=en-US?ocid=TAG_APRIL