[CQ-Contest] This is Logic?
pa5mw at home.nl
pa5mw at home.nl
Thu Jun 12 02:15:21 EDT 2008
So very much agree with all below.
The unassisted category (The Last of the Mohanicans) is held hostage by those just wanting to debate the term "unassisted".
By littering the 'redefine the rules' debate the whole contest situation is getting worse and all is put on hold. Way to go gentlemen....!
I love the category where I can only use my own EARS and turn that VFO.
Please keep THAT category as it was meant for.....!!
'73 Mark, PA5MW
---- Bill Tippett <btippett at alum.mit.edu> schrijft:
> Someone replied privately:
> Hi Bill,
> > As we say, 'In a nutshell'.........
> > My sentiments exactly.
> > This is precisely why I gave up VHF moonbounce and meteor scatter about 10
> > years ago when WSJT and so on appeared and QSOs were completed on
> > non-audible signals and also why I never operate digital modes (accepting
> > this reflector's resident pedants' point that CW is effectively a digital
> > mode). Finding and reading signals is the essence of the operating aspect of
> > this hobby. Without that, no thank you.
> I was going to mention WSJT as an example but decided not to since I
> don't operate VHF and never used it. But there are plenty of others who
> share your opinion, so I'm glad you mentioned it.
> How anyone can compare their EME and MS "accomplishments" using WSJT with
> the likes of the guys who did it "the hard way" with big antennas and their
> own ears is beyond me. I liken WSJT "accomplishments" to making DXCC Honor
> Roll by sitting on 14256 and exchanging "when last heard"s via the
> Listmeister when it's doubtful they ever actually heard anything (i.e. WSJT
> becomes the Listmeister).
> If unassisted CW contesting is now added to the trash heap of
> machine-to-machine mode assistance, it's a very sad day IMHO. Unassisted
> contesting and low-band DX-ing are one of the few individual operating areas
> still uncorrupted by machine-to-machine garbage but I can see the
> handwriting on the wall. We already have Internet QSOs via Low Band Chat
> corrupting low-band DX-ing and now even CW contesting is headed the same way
> if Skimmer is allowed in Unassisted. Yes Scott (W4PA), SSB contesting may
> be the last bastion of individual operating skill, but it's just a matter of
> time (and programming) before Skimmer affects SSB also.
> Someone previously mentioned that the Assisted category has never
> been in serious contention with the Unassisted category. I submit that's
> because both the quality and quantity of operators attracted to Unassisted
> are many dB in operating skill above those attracted to Assisted. I also
> submit that many of the folks presently in Unassisted are attracted to it
> exactly for the same reasons of personal enjoyment and accomplishment I
> previously mentioned. Take that away and I suspect a few others besides
> myself will be looking for another hobby.
> 73, Bill W4ZV
> >As soon as we all using this "non-assisted" advance in technology, we will
> be offered the attractive ability to call this station automatically when
> our decoding software determines the station is needed, is not a dupe, and
> has stood by for a call. ***We won't even have to hear any thing from the
> station we have just "worked."***
> 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
More information about the CQ-Contest