[CQ-Contest] Skimmer for S/O in IARU

[Robert Chudek - K0RC]

Joe wrote:

"The sum of an operator is his ability to integrate ALL of the tools:
technology, experience and operating skill.  A contest measures all
of that - not simply the operator's ability to copy CW by ear."


That's a pretty fair summary as far as I'm concerned. Look at the
pinnacle of contesting, the WRTC events. They are based upon the
three areas summarized in that statement. Although they are not
a pure "Single Operator" event, they require technical skills beyond
yelling into a microphone or slapping a paddle around the table.

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv at subich.com>
To: "'Stan Stockton'" <k5go at cox.net>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer for S/O in IARU


>
> Stan,
>
>> If this doesn't fall within the intent of a spotting net, I
>> don't know what does.  The benefit of a local Skimmer is so
>> much greater than packet it is not even comparable.  It
>> provides spots of EVERY station it hears and only those it
>> hears.
>
> Back off and stop letting your prejudices overrule logic.  Local
> Skimmers are NOT in any way shape or form a "Spotting net."  They
> are not a network, they are not packet and they are not the internet.
> what is does and how it does it is completely immaterial - it is a
> LOCAL device just like a memory keyer and logging computer.  It
> does what the single operator tells it to do and does not make any
> autonomous decisions about stations to work, bands to work, multipliers
> to work, etc.  Skimmer is simply one more technological tool in the
> operator's toolbox.
>
> You may feel that they are an "unfair" technological advantage but
> I feel your big antennas are an "unfair" technological advantage.
> The argument over what technology is "fair" and what is not "fair"
> is getting tiresome ... if you are going to reject, ban, or segregate
> one form of technological assistance, ban them all starting with
> memory keyers, computer logging, history files, SCP and even big
> antennas.
>
> It is tiresome when individuals attempt to selectively block the
> advancement of technology out of prejudice and fear.  You and others
> in the "No Skimmer" camp lost the "CW by ear" war with the ITU and
> FCC years ago.  Now CW is just another digital mode and it will be
> decoded by machine as much as by ear ... if someone skilled in that
> technology chooses to use it and you chose to ignore it, that's your
> choice.  However, if you want a contest that is based entirely on
> the ability to copy by ear, move to the high speed code contests
> and leave the operating contests to advance with technology as they
> have done for 60 years.
>
> The sum of an operator is his ability to integrate ALL of the tools:
> technology, experience and operating skill.  A contest measures all
> of that - not simply the operator's ability to copy CW by ear.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Stan Stockton
>> Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 12:32 PM
>> To: cq-contest at contesting.com; Jim George
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer for S/O in IARU
>>
>>
>> The rules say:
>>
>> "Use of spotting nets or packet is not permitted."
>>
>> The quote from K1ZZ reported on Radio-Sport.net is:
>>
>> "The 2008 rules are as published," was the succinct reply
>> from ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner K1ZZ.
>>
>> Apparently Radio-Sport interprets that as meaning it is
>> allowed?  Is that the official ruling or is it a subjective
>> determination as to whether it is allowed within the rules
>> that were written before this new and wonderful transforming
>> technology was developed?
>>
>> It needs to be stated that you can either use Skimmer or not
>> use Skimmer by the Contest Director.
>>
>> If this doesn't fall within the intent of a spotting net, I
>> don't know what does.  The benefit of a local Skimmer is so
>> much greater than packet it is not even comparable.  It
>> provides spots of EVERY station it hears and only those it
>> hears.
>>
>> One can play games with whether it is another operator,
>> called packet, not called packet, whether it is hooked
>> directly to your computer or networked to your computer from
>> another computer running Skimmer in the same room, etc., the
>> fact is that without any operator involvement or skill
>> whatsoever, it provides a list of every station it hears
>> calling CQ and the QRG.
>>
>> I've seen it in operation in the WPX Contest and my opinion
>> became stronger every time I saw that bandmap fill up with a
>> never ending supply of stations to click on.
>>
>> I actually believe Kevin would have done better in the WPX
>> without using it since over 1/3 of all stations worked are
>> new multipliers.  Without question, the detriment to those
>> who are not using it in a contest that has a relatively
>> limited number of multipliers is HUGE.
>>
>> Stan, K5GO
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>