[CQ-Contest] Blind Mode for N1MM Bandmap

Jack Haverty k3fiv at arrl.net
Sun Oct 24 17:18:15 PDT 2010

I'd mostly go for those rules too. It would prevent things like using a
2 meter packet connection to cross your station's boundary line to your
neighbor's house, which is connected to the full Internet spotting net. 

I think the only reason CW decoders work so well is because today most
code, especially in contests, is machine-sent, so it's perfect and
easily decodable - i.e., it's become just another digital mode, as you
pointed out.

So, if you want to outlaw CW decoders, I think that rule should be
symmetrical and outlaw CW encoders as well.  Why should it be OK to use
computers to send CW but not to receive it?  So, decode CW by ear, send
it by hand - anything from old straight key to electronic keyer, as long
as it involves a paddle.  Computer keyboards, e.g., hitting the function
keys or pushing a button to send anything more complex than dots and
dashes, don't qualify.  Any particular contest could declare CW to be
either limited to hand/ear techniques, or not.

But I still think it's cleaner for rules to treat the computer as just
another tool, which you can use inside your shack for anything you can
imagine, as long as the communications is solely by amateur radio.  

It's just very hard to draw other lines when there's so many ways in
which these tools can be used, most of which probably haven't been
invented yet.  

E.G., the N1MM logger, by quickly identifying stations, as you type
their callsign, which you've already worked, or which are unworked
multipliers, arguably helps to "find or facilitate contest QSOs", so
perhaps use of N1MM at all makes you assisted by the "using computers"
rules.  So anyone using N1MM at all would be "assisted"?

With the "radio rule", the distinction between assisted or not can be
easily seen by whether or not the information used by any tool comes
from outside via non-Radio means.


On Sat, 2010-10-23 at 09:40 +0100, Paul O'Kane wrote:
> On 22/10/2010 20:03, Jack Haverty wrote:
> > Put the Radio back into Ham Radio...but use all the tools we can
> > find to do it.
> I'd go along with that, but with three unambiguous conditions.
> 1.  The tools should not replace amateur-band RF in any part of
>      the signal path between the operators concerned - subject
>      only to the usual 500 metre radius circle / own property
>      limits for contesting,
> 2.  The tools should not involve any use, during the contest,
>      of non-amateur-radio communications modes or technologies,
>      with the potential for, or for the purpose of, finding or
>      facilatating contest QSOs.
> 3.  In CW contests, CW decoders (including Skimmer, with any
>      decoding facility enabled) should not be used.  Why?
>      Because such use reduces CW to the status of just another
>      data mode.
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list