[CQ-Contest] Revised 2011 NAQP Rules

[Ron Notarius W3WN]

Maybe we need to make clear what exactly a "Single Operator" is, since there's clearly much disagreement on the details.

A humble proposal, if I may:
-----------------------------------------
Proposed General Definition:  Single Operator (SO) Category
A single individual performs ALL aspects of station operations.  This person, and only this person, makes all of the contacts, maintains the log, and operates the equipment.  This individual gets no assistance from others people (licensed amateurs or not) in these aspects.

1.    Single Operator (aka SO / Unassisted):
a.    The individual operator gets not technical or technological aids in the performance of finding other stations on the band(s) to make contacts with.  
b.    No spotting networks or systems are permitted, either on the air, on the telephone, on the Internet, via email or fax, or through other means.
c.    A casual mention to the individual on the air in the course of operating is not considered assistance.  [

2.    Single Operaotr / Assisted (aka SO / Unlimited)
a.    The individual operator is permitted a limited amount of technical or technological aids in the performance of finding other stations on the band(s) to make contacts with.  
b.    Spotting networks or systems are permitted within the limitations of a particular contest's specific rules.

To be clear: 

1(c) means that if someone mentions to you on the air, in passing, that a particular station is on a particular frequency at the time, especially if unsolicited ("Hey Joe!  P5/OH2BH is up 10 calling CQ!  Go work 'em!), the operator is not consider SO/A.

2(b) means that the rules committee for a particular contest can determine what type of spotting or technical assistance is permitted... one contest may approve clusters but not skimmers, another may say anthing goes.

73, ron w3wn
----------------------------------------------------------


Jan 4, 2011 08:33:09 AM, W5OV at W5OV.COM wrote:

Is this really a big issue? How many CW contest entrants fit this
description? I suspect that it is a small minority if there are any at all.

I think that for discussion purposes, the likely very small minority of
operators who need this form of technology-based CW copying assistance can
be addressed through an exemption to whatever rule is established for the
vast majority who don't need or want such an operating aid.

In other words we would have a rule:

1) CW Unassisted Single Op is: blah, blah, blah
a) Exemption: If an entrant is "either physically or mentally unable
to copy by ear, or by eye, or by typing what they can see or hear" he may
choose to use a single channel decoder technology to allow him or her to
participate.

I don't think anyone would object to this, nor have I seen anyone say
otherwise.

de W5OV


-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of David Robbins
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 6:43 AM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Revised 2011 NAQP Rules

inadequate and not politically correct... you need a better definition that
accounts for those who are either physically or mentally unable to copy by
ear, or by eye, or by typing what they can see or hear.


Jan 3, 2011 09:06:57 PM, w4pa at yahoo.com wrote:

W5OV:

>The focus instead should be "what are the characteristics of an unassisted
>single op"? 

Ear, not eye. 

Scott
W4PA





_______________________________________________
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