[CQ-Contest] rules

kd4d at comcast.net kd4d at comcast.net
Wed Jun 4 12:56:58 EDT 2008

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Eric Scace K3NA <eric at k3na.org>
> Hi Randy et al --
>    We are seeing a blizzard of rules proposals and counter-proposals.  
> But we don't actually know if there is a "problem" yet with CW skimmers.
>    Rather than changing rules, let's do this:
> 1.  For the next two years, when reporting a score, also answer this 
> question:
>    "Did you use a CW Skimmer or its equivalent?"
> This question applies to all entrants: single op and multi-op.
> 2.  Publish the line scores with a mark indicating the answer to that 
> question.
> 3.  In 2010 June, review the results of the past two years to determine
>   a)  Does the use of a CW skimmer have a material impact on scores?
>   b)  If yes, do the award categories need to be changed in some way?  
> Or is disclosure sufficient?
> -- Eric K3NA

Hi Eric:

If the Skimmer was just a single program which was roughly frozen at its
current capabilities, I would agree with you.  However, I think
it will rapidly evolve and that others will create programs with greater 
capabilities.  Taking the basic skimmer technology and creating a "robot"
which would totally automate working the stations is a logical next

Two years is a VERY long time.  I think a discussion of whether we as a 
community want to draw a line before contests are being won by
automated stations is appropriate now.


Mark, KD4D

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list