[CQ-Contest] Self spotting rationale

[Joe]

I'll take it back another step,  How about the local 2 meter spotting 
network frequency,  all FM voice..

Joe WB9SBD

w1md at cfl.rr.com wrote:

>Well, except at it's inception back in the early 80's the "Packet Spotting Network" was just that...x.25 Amateur Radio Packet Spotting. We tend to forget the roots of things...of course I happened to be able to participate first hand in the some of the first Packet Spotting networks in New England. later it migrated to a mixed mode with internet taking up more and more of the network load.
>
>73,
>
>Marty
>W1MD
>
>---- Sandy Taylor <ve4xt at mts.net> wrote: 
>  
>
>>The no-spotting rule, IIRC, stemmed from the rule, that, since time began
>>(in contesting, at least), says you cannot use non-amateur means to solicit
>>QSOs.
>>
>>Using the Internet to place your own spots would be using non-amateur means
>>to solicit QSOs.
>>
>>An operator has NO control over what others might do, and is not initiating
>>the spot himself, so spotting by others is permitted.
>>
>>73,kelly
>>Ve4xt
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
>>[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Robert Chudek - K0RC
>>Sent: July-28-09 9:18 PM
>>To: cq-contest at contesting.com
>>Subject: [CQ-Contest] Self spotting rationale
>>
>>This isn't a rhetorical question.
>>
>>How / why was the "no self spotting" rule created in the first place? Was it
>>a knee-jerk reaction to the introduction of new technology at the time
>>spotting networks began to flourish? What actual purpose does this rule
>>serve? Whatever that purpose, is it outdated by technology?
>>
>>The use of the spotting networks automatically classifies a participant as
>>"assisted" in the first place. To the non-assisted participants, why would
>>they care whether stations were self-spotting or not? When I operate in the
>>non-assisted category I don't care what is going on with the spotting
>>network.
>>
>>To the participants in the "assisted" category, why not let them spot their
>>brains out? Other than saturating the spotting network I don't see a
>>down-side to this. If an assisted station spotted themselves once every X
>>minutes, many things would "fall into place."
>>
>>First, there would be fewer busted calls being spotted. Second, assisted
>>operators would know which bands were being used by the self spotter (are
>>they operating 10 meters right now or not?). Third, self spotting timers
>>could evolve in contest software to spot on a predetermined schedule.
>>Fourth, David's spotting reports would not be necessary to see who was
>>breaking the rules. Fifth, I wouldn't have to worry whether my call would
>>appear on a report as "helping my team mates in our contest club" when I
>>spot the members. (I have basically quit spotting anyone compared to the
>>early days of the spotting network.)
>>
>>I can only imagine if Wal-Mart, Target, and K-Mart were not allowed to
>>advertise their stores were open for business and what times you would find
>>them open. I think the "no self spotting" rule is absurd.
>>
>>73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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
>>    
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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 - www.avg.com 
>Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.36/2272 - Release Date: 07/30/09 05:58:00
>
>  
>