[CQ-Contest] Is it time that the contest sponsors officially identify SCP as "assisted?"
wa5rtg at gmail.com
Wed Dec 2 09:41:27 EST 2015
Making code readers cause you to be in assisted category is a stop measure to total automation. After lunch the other day, my bother who is not a ham and who heard nothing but talk of all this for an hour during lunch, told me that it seemed a very small step to go from what is being done by a human to total automation.
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:00 AM, "john at kk9a.com" <john at kk9a.com> wrote:
> Until recently I thought that assisted meant getting outside assistance to
> find stations, typically multipliers. Skimmer made this more complicated
> as it really is not anyone else helping you find stations. Then the
> committee changed the rules to include code readers as assisted. Certainly
> logging software and computer generated CW are also some type of
> assistance or why would we use them. There would be no way to run on two
> bands simultaneously using a keyer and pad of paper. Where does this end?
> John KK9A
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Is it time that the contest sponsors officially
> identify SCP as "assisted?"
> From: kr2q at optimum.net
> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 23:26:40 +0000 (GMT)
> List-post: <cq-contest at contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Yes, the sponsors (or their committees) make the rules and the definitions.
> In CQWW and other contests, use of a database to alter calls is not
> allowed...post contest.
> There can be zero doubt that using SCP is using a database assembled by
> Is there really a difference in changing a callsign during the contest via
> of a db as
> compared to changing it after the contest via a database? Think about it.
> Please focus on the "database" aspect rather than the timing aspect.
> If CQWW can recognize use of a CW decoder (any type, not just skimmer
> type) as
> then why not recognize use of SCP as assisted?
> For me (IMHO), use of SCP is far more "assisted" than use of a cw decoder.
> If SCP partial is not helping you "copy" the callsign, then why use it?
> you be happy
> to operate without it? If yes, then say so. If no, say so...and please
> clarify why not.
> This is an old tune for me. See my NCJ article from May 1996, which covers
> many topics,
> including SCP. Don't have it available? Write me and I'll send you a copy.
> Some things never change....or can they?
> Usual disclaimer about my opinion versus my membership on the CQWWCC.
> de Doug KR2Q
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest