[CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge

[Andrew]

Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
> 
>> If Skimmer acts like Packet WE DON’T LIKE IT! If Skimmer is 
>> even nearly as efficient as the world wide spotting network 
>> now it WILL MAKE THE UN-ASSISTED CLASS MEANINGLESS. We do 
>> everything to avoid it in this case. 
> 
> It simply DOES NOT MATTER whether you like it or not - if you 
> don’t like it, don't use it.  
> 
> The rules do not prohibit technology or we would not have 
> memory keyers, computer logging, history files and SCP.  The 
> rules speak only to participation by individuals other than 
> the station operator.  

Not strictly true!  Take the 2007 CQWW rules as an example 
(http://www.cqww.com/2007_rules_cqww.pdf)...

Section III.A.1 Single Operator High: Those stations at which _one_ 
_person_ performs all of the operating, logging, _and_ _spotting_ 
_functions_. The use of _DX_ _alerting_ _assistance_ _of_ _any_ _kind_ 
places the station in the Single Operator Assisted category.  (my 
emphasis on the underlined parts)

I haven't checked the specific wording in the WPX or ARRL rules, but I 
think it's fair to say the CQWW rules are quite clear that Skimmer would 
place an entrant in the Assisted category due to Skimmer being "DX 
alerting assistance".

Andrew AC6WI