[CQ-Contest] Past Prediction of the Future of Contesting.

[rjairam at gmail.com]

And I said exactly that.

I want unassisted to remain, but I think that if a voice skimmer comes
along it shouldn't be reflexively banned. It should be accommodated in
a category that allows for that kind of assistance or another new
category.

But wanting the entire state of amateur radio and contesting
technology to be permanently frozen in time goes against what amateur
radio is about.

Ria
N2RJ

On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 8:20 PM Paul O'Kane <pokane at ei5di.com> wrote:
>
> On 22/08/2021 22:49, rjairam at gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > Hams being so anti technology is mind blowing. I have never seen such
> > a paradox except in ham radio.
> >
> > (yes, it also talks about skill but that doesn't mean we have to shun
> > technology).
>
> Not all technology is, by definition, appropriate.  When new
> technologies change the fundamental nature of an activity, the very
> thing that gives that activity its name, then the name needs to change
> accordingly.
>
> After all, add an engine (200-year-old technology) and sailboat racing
> becomes powerboat racing.
>
> The issue facing ham radio is that some technologies have the potential
> to eliminate operating skills entirely.   To object is not to be
> anti-technology - it is to be anti-inappropriate-technology.
>
> There has to be limits - I suggest a digital non-proliferation treaty
> might be in order.
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest