[CQ-Contest] This is Logic? - Putting it in perspective

w1md at cfl.rr.com w1md at cfl.rr.com
Wed Jun 11 13:52:20 EDT 2008

Some of you may have seen this(these) video(s)...if you can forgive the non-contest bent...I think you will 'see' the bigger picture...

...then again, maybe not...some are just "shiftless"... :)

SHIFT Happens



---- Tod -ID <tod at k0to.us> wrote: 
> Bill et. al. :
> I think that there is little chance that anyone can remove our personal
> opportunity to do the things you write of in your second paragraph below.
> The only thing that they can do is hamper your ability to compare your
> results with others who choose to operate in the same fashion as you have
> operated.
> If the contest sponsors are imprudent enough to change the rules and define
> an 'unassisted' situation as including use of Skimmer technology in any
> manner -local, remote, networked, upstairs when you are downstairs, etc.
> that really only affects the way in which they organize the scores. I admit
> there may be a change in some of the contest dynamics, but since we already
> have packet assistance it should not be extremely noticeable as one operates
> during the contest. 
> The crucial thing is to get such contest sponsors to require inclusion of
> whether or not a Skimmer was 'in play' for the contestant and then for the
> post contest listings of the participants to provide that data as well. If
> the contest sponsors wish to aggregate scores from human operators and
> human+Skimmer operators that is their right I would think.
> But, if there is some indication of which stations were human+Skimmer in the
> listings, those of us who wish to compare our performance to others with the
> same definition of 'unassisted' can do so by downloading the scores and
> dropping the ones we find not of interest.
> In any case, I do not choose to let someone else define how I will do my
> operating. I am quite content to work "fully automated stations or human
> operated stations or human+Skimmer stations.
> As a closing remark, the arguments presented in defense of the concept
> "Skimmer is not assisted operation" remind me of the story about the Indiana
> State Legislature in the 19th century passing a Law that stated "the Earth,
> by definition, is flat". Statements and decisions are not required to be
> correct -- they are only required to be decisions or statements. Correctness
> depends upon data and facts, not wishful thinking.
> Tod, K0TO
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------
> > 
> >          Exactly...and when this happens CW is relegated to 
> > just another machine-to-machine digital mode.  This is the 
> > end game of allowing Skimmer in unassisted.  Since we already 
> > have RTTY contests, why create another computer-to-computer mode?
> > When that happens, count me out.
> > 
> >          What I personally enjoy in DX-ing and contesting is 
> > the *hearing and copying* of weak signals with my own ears 
> > and brain.  Copying those weak fluttery signals amidst the 
> > QRM and QRN crashes.  Remove that element and I'll go find 
> > something more interesting to do with my time.
> > 
> >                                          73,  Bill  W4ZV
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list