[CQ-Contest] Late to the skimmer party

[wd5acr at comcast.net]

I haven't read the whole thread, so this may be a redundant suggestion, but why not create a fully automated class?  Let the ugly bags of mostly water struggle it out, while the superior machines use them to pick up some multipliers.  That way everybody's happy.

A comment on Tree's sentiment below - I sometimes wonder what it would be like to go total retro and operate ARRL DX CW like my grampa did; a straight key , pencil and paper.  Now that's real skill.

Matt 
WD5ACR

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Richard L. King" <k5na at ecpi.com> 

> What Tree says pretty well sums up my own feelings about the skimmer. 
> 
> I don't think it is much different, technologically, as the 
> advancement contesters made to two radio contesting. It is still, 
> basically, one operator with software and hardware to magnify what he 
> is capable of doing while operating. So an argument can be made that 
> the skimmer isn't truly "assisted". 
> 
> But I agree that using the skimmer is a little much for a single-op 
> entry. I think this is where we should draw the line and I encourage 
> the contest sponsors to put the use of a skimmer in the assisted 
> class. Let us contesters continue to do our own call copying in the 
> single-op (not assisted) category. 
> 
> 73, Richard - K5NA 
> 
> 
> 
> At 15:48 3/22/2008, Tree wrote: 
> 
> >Hi all- 
> > 
> >Just got back from a two week vacation, so am late to the skimmer 
> >party. Lots of interesting comments - good to see the discussion. 
> > 
> >Just think back about 20 years ago where the internet didn't really 
> >exist yet... this discussion would take a lot longer to work out. 
> > 
> >I think the crux of this issue has a lot to do with how we all "feel" 
> >about it. Obviously, for some, this "feels" like assistance - much 
> >like packet - and for others, it is just an extension of the constant 
> >march of technology. 
> > 
> >I guess one of the basic questions is "When is it too much technology?" 
> >By that - I mean - when is radio turned into something that is about 
> >as much "fun" as picking up your phone to talk to someone? 
> > 
> >That is a question we are all going to have slightly different answers 
> >to. Some of us will want to protect the way we "think" about operating 
> >contests - and others will see this as an advancement in the state of 
> >the art. 
> > 
> >It is going to be an emotional debate - and as in the case of packet 
> >assistance - there will not be one answer that solves all of the issues. 
> > 
> >So - for this contester - I do "feel" that skimmers "go too far" for the 
> >"traditional" single-op. I believe this technology has the potential to 
> >dramatically change how contests are won - and I do not see adding it to 
> >the equation is how I want to win contests. 
> > 
> >The main contest I think about when I say that is the SS CW contest. 
> >There are a lot of operators who have learned how to tune a second 
> >radio on their own to find new QSOs during the second half of the 
> >contest. I believe this "human" effort is a great aspect to the 
> >contest - where hours of tedious "work" are rewarded by putting another 
> >10 or 20 QSOs in the log. This "effort" is what helps determine who 
> >will make the top ten - or not. 
> > 
> >I have finished 11th in the past two SS CW contests. I am still driven 
> >to try and get back into the top ten box from home - not an easy thing 
> >to always do. I do feel that if I had put in more hard work, I might 
> >have found that VO1 that has eluded me both times - and made it into 
> >the box. This motivates me to get on next time and see if I have better 
> >luck - and to improve my second radio skills and effort. 
> > 
> >I have very little doubt that the skimmer technology probably would have 
> >made the difference in both of these cases. However, "for me" - that 
> >would end up feeling just like I used packet and it wasn't my set of 
> >ears that found the station through my own efforts. 
> > 
> >I believe that contesting is interesting because of the human element we 
> >bring into it. Things like computer logging and sending CW to diminsh 
> >this some - but for many of us - that means we are now free to spend 
> >more of out time using our ears. The skimmer goes to far - as it enables 
> >us to start winning contests by doing something that significantly reduces 
> >the effort our ears put into it. 
> > 
> >"For me" - the magic of radio happens between the headphones. This is 
> >too much like using a digital mode for EME. It removes the human too 
> >far from the magic and is therefore not as much fun... for me. 
> > 
> >If using the skimmer becomes a "requirement" for me to make the top ten 
> >box in the SS CW contest - I will have a choice to make. I hope that I 
> >won't have to. 
> > 
> >73 Tree N6TR/7 
> >tree at kkn.net 
> >_______________________________________________ 
> >CQ-Contest mailing list 
> >CQ-Contest at contesting.com 
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> CQ-Contest mailing list 
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com 
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest