[CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge
Ron Notarius W3WN
wn3vaw at verizon.net
Wed Jun 11 12:51:42 EDT 2008
Well Joe, I agree with you...
But it's pretty obvious from some of the discussions/flamefests that we've seen lately (and before) on this (and other) subject(s), that there are many who would DISAGREE with you on exactly what the term "Assisted" means in the context of the operating contest station environment.
Until there is, if not agreement, then a cease-fire over exactly what the term is supposed to mean, and in what context... trying to define the role of Skimmer and similar devices within the concept of the SO/A station will ultimately fail.
And that's just over exactly what is or isn't an "assisted" station; we haven't even touched on exactly what or how Skimmer et. al. are actually being used!
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv at subich.com>
Date: 2008/06/10 Tue PM 09:06:04 EDT
To: ve4xt at mts.net, "'Kerr,Prof. K.M.'" <k.kerr at abdn.ac.uk>,
'Michael Coslo' <mjc5 at psu.edu>,
'cq-contesting cq-contest' <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge
> > You do not have the right to define the debate on your own terms.
> Then, Joe, one question: why do you?
I am not redefining the debate on my own terms as you have done.
I keep trying to bring the debate back to the traditional frame
of reference. "Assisted" is simply a shorthand for defining the
participation by an additional person or persons in an "operator"
role who is not actually making the contacts. Since the term
first came into use, "assisted" has always meant another person,
whether on site or remotely, who provided spotting information.
"Assisted" has never been applied to productivity enhancing
technology of any description - including those technologies that
form the basis of skimmer type systems.
More information about the CQ-Contest