[CQ-Contest] : Reverse beacon of my own call?

[Bob Naumann]

Iain,

I'm afraid your interpretation is dependent on presumptions that have no
basis in the specific wording of the rules in question.

As I quoted earlier, (paraphrased now to avoid being redundant) single ops
are precluded from using "any" type of assistance. (Simple, eh?) 

In an unfortunate choice of words, it specifically says "QSO Alerting
Assistance" but to the CQWW's credit, this "QSO Alerting Assistance" term is
expanded and defined very clearly elsewhere in the rules so no one needs to
interpret anything. This term has a specific meaning in the context of the
rules that again, needs no interpretation.

In that definition, it spells out clearly that the use of RBN (among other
listed technologies) is precluded for single ops. There's no interpretation
needed.  That is exactly what it says.

The chosen wording was specifically intended NOT to only preclude specific
technologies because it was anticipated that someone could call another form
of assistance some other name to avoid being covered.

The actual preclusion phrase is : " It includes, but is not limited to, use
of DX cluster, packet, local or remote call sign and frequency decoding
technology (e.g., CW Skimmer or Reverse Beacon Network), or operating
arrangements involving other individuals".

 I don't think there is any way that RBN's presence in that list of
precluded technologies can be denied or interpreted to not apply.

73,

Bob W5OV
(I enter most contests as ASSISTED)

CQWW Rules:  http://www.cqww.com/rules.htm




-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
iain macdonnell - N6ML
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 10:21 PM
To: Ron Notarius W3WN
Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] : Reverse beacon of my own call?

Hi Ron,

Don't apologize for disagreeing - if we all agreed all the time, the
discussion would be pointless! :)

In my interpretation, the intent of the rule is to prohibit use of any
technology that would alert the operator of the frequencies of
stations that are CQing, particularly multipliers, so the operator is
forced to use the big knob on the front of the radio, and his/her
ears, to find stations/multipliers to work. CW Skimmer and RBN are
stated as examples of such technology, but the point of the rule is to
prohibit "QSO alerting assistance", not specifically to prohibit
specific named technologies. If it was, someone could re-implement the
CW Skimmer concept and call it something like "CW Searcher", and be
able to use it without violating the rule. Clearly that's not the
intent. In my option, using RBN to find out where you are being heard
is something completely different from "QSO alerting assistance", and
therefore it is not in violation of the [intent of] the rule.

Not trying to be argumentative - just stating my opinion. Of course
ultimately it's the contest organiser's opinion that really matters...

73,

    ~iain / N6ML



On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw at verizon.net>
wrote:
> Sorry Iain, I must respectfully disagree with you.
>
> It is very clear from the way the rule is written that the intent is to
> prohibit a single operator from using RBN, since RBN is derived from
> Skimmer.  And RBN is explicitly prohibited.
>
> I also don't agree that parsing the rule to find a smidgen of a loophole
is
> appropriate.  This is not a court of law, after all.  And I strongly
suspect
> that if someone was going to try and argue that point, the wording of the
> rule would likely be "clarified" to eliminate any seeming discrepancy.
>
> It seems pretty clear:  Use of RBN by SO stations is prohibited.  Period.
>
> 73
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> iain macdonnell - N6ML
> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 9:18 PM
> To: w5ov at w5ov.com
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] : Reverse beacon of my own call?
>
> The way I read the CQWW rule, RBN is an *example* of a "technology or
> other source that *COULD PROVIDE* call sign or multiplier
> identification along with frequency information to the operator". If
> it is not used to provide the operator with frequency information
> about other call signs / multipliers, I don't think it would be in
> violation of the rule. Another example might be CW Skimmer in "BLIND
> mode" (not sure what the CQWW position on that actually is).
>
> Personally, I don't think that querying the RBN to see where you're
> being heard constitutes "QSO alerting assistance"... JMHO...
>
> 73,
>
>     ~iain / N6ML
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:19 PM,  <w5ov at w5ov.com> wrote:
>> There are two parts to the CQWW rules concerning single operator that
make
>> this entirely clear and without exception:
>>
>> The first:
>> A. Single Operator Categories
>> 1. Single Operator: QSO alerting assistance of any kind is prohibited
(see
>> VIII.2).
>>
>> Second: Definitions:
>>
>> VIII.2. QSO alerting assistance: The use of any technology or other
source
>> that provides call sign or multiplier identification along with frequency
>> information to the operator. It includes, but is not limited to, use of
DX
>> cluster, packet, local or remote call sign and frequency decoding
>> technology (e.g., CW Skimmer or Reverse Beacon Network), or operating
>> arrangements involving other individuals.
>>
>> So, as I read it, it says specifically that Single Ops may not use RBN
>> since RBN is part of the definition of assistance. It has nothing to do
>> with remote receivers.
>>
>> The rules are published here:
>>
>> http://www.cqww.com/rules.htm
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Bob W5OV
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> "BTW CQ WW rules clearly disallow RBN for Single Operators with no any
>> Exception"
>>> Actually it doesn't.  The rules state that this technology cannot be
>> used
>>> to
>>> decode callsign and frequency information or multiplier information.
> Since
>>> you know your callsign, transmit frequency, and whether you need
>> yourself
>>> for a mult before looking for a signal report on RBN, there is actually
>> no
>>> violation of the rules on the surface from my read.
>>> You could argue it's the use of a remote receiver.  However if that is
>> the
>>> case than all RBN use would be prohibited for all users regardless of
> class
>>> except extreme.
>>> My interpretation of the rules only but read them yourself and see if
>> you
>>> disagree.
>>> 73
>>> Ed  N1UR
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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