[CQ-Contest] Is it time that the contest sponsors officially identify SCP as "assisted?"

[Radio K0HB]

The "no code reader" rule bugs me a little bit.




It seems a departure from the "no outside source of Call/QRG" paradigm which previously was the generally accepted definition of assistance.




Perhaps the sponsor could share their rationale for this restriction.  As a long time CW guy with failing ears......  Well, let's just say that it's a growing crowd.






__73, de Hans, K0HB

"Just a Boy and His Radio"™

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:37 PM, w2up at comcast.net <w2up at comcast.net> wrote:

>     Yes, automation is on the way. Last month I drove from Denver to Vegas and back with no foot on the pedal and no hands on the steering wheel for 1400 of the 1700 mile trip. Compared to that, automated contesting is easy!  
> Barry W2UP 
> Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Smartphone
> ------ Original message------From: Stan StocktonDate: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 8:35 AMTo: john at kk9a.com;Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com;Subject:Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time that the contest sponsors officially identify SCP as "assisted?"
> 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.73...Stan, K5GO/ZF2ET> On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:00 AM, "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:    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> others.> Is there really a difference in changing a callsign during the contest via> use> 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> assisted,> 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? > Would> 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> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest_______________________________________________CQ-Contest mailing listCQ-Contest at contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest