[CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge
Dick Green WC1M
wc1m at msn.com
Tue Jun 17 13:04:00 EDT 2008
I don't want to get too deeply into any more Skimmer conversations on this
reflector because I've already gotten in too deep!
I'll just say I don't disagree about the intent of the rule, and I can see
where some people would read the wording to prohibit Skimmer. But others may
read it differently. My point is that we shouldn't have rules that require
interpretation. There would be no harm, and plenty of good, if the wording
was made more explicit.
That's all from me for now.
73, Dick WC1M
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stan Stockton [mailto:k5go at cox.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:15 AM
> To: Mark Beckwith; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Cc: wc1m at msn.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge
> I agree with Mark and others on this.
> I believe the intent of the rule was that the single operator would
> 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
> operator unassisted entry if a list of stations appears on a bandmap
> 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
> of spotting that could not be envisioned at the time the rule was
> Stan, K5GO
> > 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
> > Mark, N5OT
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > --
> > 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