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

Michael Adams mda at n1en.org
Thu Dec 3 14:13:49 EST 2015

I think the difference between RTTY decoders and CW decoders is the essence of the two modes.   The game of RTTY contesting inherently, by the mode's nature, requires us to interpret machine copy.   The core essence of the magic of CW involves those of us in this fairly small fraternity interpreting our common language on our own.

There isn't necessarily anything wrong with a decoder for CW; it's just a significant deviation from that essence.

By the way, I like the neatness of using "inside the station" vs "outside the station" as a potentially cleaner demarcation between entry classes.  (If it were universally adopted, we'd have to find a new perpetual argument!)  But I think that kind of distinction loses the fact that there is a score-influencing difference between operating "boy and his radio" style versus "use every tool I can because more Q's = more fun".

At the end of the day, as long as it doesn't require much brain power to figure out what entry class to put on my log right after the contest, and as long as I don't have to watch the clock to avoid running afoul of pesky band-change rules, I don't care.  I just want the fun of putting Q's in the log, garnished with the occasional "gee whiz" when nifty DX is encountered.  :)

Michael Adams | N1EN | mda at n1en.org

-----Original Message-----

__73, de Hans, K0HB

"Just a Boy and His Radio"™

​PS:  Voice recognition technology is maturing rapidly.  Will contest sponsors view it as the equivalent of a CW decoder?  If not, why not?  How about RTTY decoders?

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list