[CQ-Contest] Skimmer vs. assisted

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> What does Cluster do? It shows you who's where, with 
> callsigns, assuming the poster copied correctly.

There would be no question that CW Skimmer is not assistance if 
the cluster system were not so widely abused.  CW Skimmer is 
simply the next step in the evolution of contest hardware that 
started with CQ wheels, memory keyers, tape loops, and computer 
logging.  Every technological advancement has had the effect 
of a "second operator" - particularly computer logging - there
is nothing wrong with that and nobody calls that "logging 
assistance."  Similarly, CW Skimmer is not assistance it is one 
more instance of technology offloading some part of the operator's 
load. 
     
> Clearly, the rule makers have some work to do. My vote is to 
> label Skimmer as assistance or as a surrogate op.

It would be foolish and inconsistent to permit remote operation 
and ban Skimmer. 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy Taylor [mailto:ve4xt at mts.net] 
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 9:47 PM
> To: 'Joe Subich, W4TV'; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer vs. assisted
> 
> 
> Question:
> 
> What does Cluster do? It shows you who's where, with 
> callsigns, assuming the poster copied correctly.
> 
> Does CW Skimmer show you who is on the band, with callsigns?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> That it's a robot in your shack doesn't change that.
> 
> Why is getting spots from one assistance and getting spots 
> from another not? Truth is, there is no difference. Which is 
> why the rule writers at CQ were prescient enough to include 
> OF ANY KIND in the rules.
> 
> OK, maybe that's the ticket: since CW Skimmer is just like a 
> second op, let's put all Skimmer users into Multiop.
> 
> It's not like you point it at a signal you've found and read 
> who it is: Skimmer shows you where the signal is and who it is.
> 
> If that's not assistance, then what is?
> 
> Clearly, the rulemakers have some work to do. My vote is to 
> label Skimmer as assistance or as a surrogate op.
> 
> Either way, the robots are taking over. Asimov was right. 
> 
> 73, Kelly
> Ve4xt
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Subich, W4TV [mailto:w4tv at subich.com] 
> Sent: March-21-08 8:34 PM
> To: 'Kelly Taylor'; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer vs. assisted
> 
> 
> > Both contests classify as assisted an operator who is using
> > "DX alerting assistance OF ANY KIND." (Emphasis added.) The 
> > rule goes on to say that it includes packet, cluster, nets 
> > involving other individuals, but it does not limit the 
> > description to those forms of assistance.
> 
> CW Skimmer is not "DX alerting assistance" any more than WriteLog's 
> CW decoder or CW Get with a second receiver is DX Alerting 
> assistance. 
> Other than the number of simultaneous signals that can be decoded 
> there is no difference between the WriteLog "broadband decoder" on 
> a second radio and CW Skimmer running on a multi-band Softrock or 
> SDR-IQ. 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> > [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Kelly Taylor
> > Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 4:50 PM
> > To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer vs. assisted
> > 
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I agree that with some contests, there is a grey area
> > regarding whether 
> > Skimmer constitutes assistance.
> > 
> > However, there is no grey area, no splitting of hairs when it
> > comes to CQ WW 
> > and WPX.
> > 
> > Both contests classify as assisted an operator who is using
> > "DX alerting 
> > assistance OF ANY KIND." (Emphasis added.) The rule goes on 
> > to say that it 
> > includes packet, cluster, nets involving other individuals, 
> > but it does not 
> > limit the description to those forms of assistance. At the 
> > end of the day, 
> > nothing in that rule overrides the OF ANY KIND bit. Nor does 
> > the fact that 
> > historic precedent has been that assistance is a form of 
> > packet or spots 
> > from other stations.
> > 
> > It does not say DX alerting assistance only when it involves
> > other people. 
> > It does not say DX alerting assistance unless it's a piece of 
> > hardware in 
> > your own shack. It says of any kind.
> > 
> > I would suggest the ARRL CAC has some work to do, as it could
> > be argued that 
> > the rules of ARRL contests do not restrict Skimmer use. I 
> > simply cannot see 
> > how something that finds the stations for you AND decodes 
> > their callsigns 
> > isn't assistance.
> > 
> > (The argument that the description of assistance could then
> > be transferred 
> > to receivers and rotator control boxes and amplifiers is 
> > spurious, at best.)
> > 
> > 73, kelly
> > ve4xt
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> 
>