[CQ-Contest] Expansion of Skimmer Subject

[Dick Dievendorff]

Stan, K5GO writes: 

>The only way I can think of to prevent full automation in 
>CW Contesting is to have a rule against using a computer 
>or machine to copy code.  I know this is going to upset 
>some people. Sorry but, in my opinion, the day a station 
>wins a CW Contest and the operator listed cannot copy 
>CW is the day CW Contesting will be ruined.   .

Why is it OK to have a computer or machine generate Morse code but not OK to
have a computer or machine copy code?

I suggest that your proposed constraint is more appropriate to Straight Key
Night than CW contests.

Frankly I would prefer to listen to robot-assisted Morse code (i.e. the
near-perfect output of a LogiKey or WinKey) than a whole lot of "uniquely"
adjusted Vibroplex bugs. The ability to use machine-generated Morse makes it
easier for many to enter (and stay longer in) CW contests.  It makes
contesting much more enjoyable for the listener as well as the sender.

We don't need rules that tend to push casual entrants away, we should be
looking for ways to draw people in. Lists of "you can't do this and you
can't do that" in order to be a "real man" are off-putting.

So if my speed-challenged colleague wants to use a CW reader to make a few
more QSOs than he might otherwise, please encourage him to get into the
contest.

I'll use my commonly accepted computer or machine to send my contest
exchanges much more reliably and with better spacing than I could with a
straight key. I'd be more proficient with a paddle if I used one exclusively
in contests. I've accepted this tradeoff.

Dick, K6KR