[CQ-Contest] The Skimmer Rule Challenge

[Stan Stockton]

K1MK Wrote:

> If the rules really do allow this and the fear of being "exposed" for 
> doing something legal doesn't exist, I have to  ask again, why hasn't 
> this been done?

Mike,

Skimmer changes it into something that can be automatic.  This is a completely different animal 
than a "good-hearted" individual sitting there copying callsigns and typing them on a keyboard all night.

Not to give anyone any new ideas but what the heck.  While exploring all the possibilities of using every 
piece of technology and software we can at the expense of preserving CW Contesting for what it is, someone 
needs to write software that would use Skimmer and a SDR to find a specified callsign of interest, move a 
regular receiver to that guy's frequency with a 1 Khz wide filter and spot all the callsigns of those heard 
to a private network used by the Multi or assisted entrant.  I think that might help the ole score on 160M 
and 80M with that setup in Europe.  I am not someone who writes software but I'll bet someone can do what 
I just described within a week.

It would be completely automatic and will follow the guy to whatever frequency he decides to run on.  
All it takes is that good hearted individual who is not part of the operation on the other continent.  
He can be out of town for the weekend and it will work perfectly.

Pertaining to whether someone had ever contemplated it before, you  wrote:

>And I'm extremely incredulous that this possibility has never 
>been contemplated before now.

Given your number 2 possibility from a previous post that competitors accept it as being contrary to the rules, 
I'm not incredulous at all.  I believe that is the reason why it has not been done as far as we know.  

However, it appears we now have a new thought process.  Throughout this whole debate, it is evident that a 
lot of guys are very carefully reading and interpreting the specific wording of the rules, paying absolutely 
no attention to what they should know the intent of the rule to be, and the line perhaps has been removed for 
some on whether they will choose not to do something because, even though not covered in the rules, they would 
consider it cheating.  That part is just sad.

Stan, K5GO