[CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge
k5go at cox.net
Tue Jun 17 09:14:30 EDT 2008
I agree with Mark and others on this.
I believe the intent of the rule was that the single operator would tune
his radio to find stations to work. The source that would provide a
list of stations to work, other than the operator tuning his radio to
find stations, is immaterial.
The result is the same and it does not fall into the intent of a single
operator unassisted entry if a list of stations appears on a bandmap for
him to work.
If there had been exceptions that would be OK for a single operator to
have a list of stations provided they would have been specifically
listed. The etc was, in my opinion, added to encompass all other types
of spotting that could not be envisioned at the time the rule was
> WC1M said:
>> (operating arrangements involving other individuals,
>> DX-alerting nets, packet, Internet, etc)
>> The phrase in parenthesis defines the terms ...
>> and it doesn't include anything like local Skimmer.
> Dick, I believe the phrase does include things "like local Skimmer"
> and the
> "etc" drives it home. To me the definition clearly includes Skimmer.
> Mark, N5OT
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1505 - Release Date:
> 6/16/2008 7:20 AM
More information about the CQ-Contest