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

Tue Aug 24 17:22:38 EDT 2021

See you, and raise you 10 watts and grid modulation (Globe Scout, 1956 
or thereabouts).  Now there was a deterrent to phone contesting.

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network
web server at <http://beta.reversebeacon.net>.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

On 8/24/2021 3:15 PM, John Geiger wrote:
> But only if the radio doesn't have DSP, a built in keyer, a built in voice
> keyer, a synthesizer, dual VFOs.  Maybe it should be rockbound.  I miss my
> HW-16.
>
> 73 John AF5CC
>
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 6:19 AM rjairam at gmail.com <rjairam at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A lot of hams are indeed anti technology.
>>
>> Anything beyond "a boy and his radio" twiddling knobs is viewed as
>> "not real ham radio."
>>
>> It's a pervasive attitude in some circles in ham radio.
>>
>> And it's against both basis and purpose and the amateur's code.
>>
>> Ria
>> N2RJ
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 2:58 PM ku8e <ku8e at ku8e.com> wrote:
>>> RiaMaybe you did but before that statement you stated that "Hams are
>> anti-technology". It seems to me you were suggesting that anyone who
>> doesn't embrace assisted technology such as skimmer was against technology.
>> Most serious contesters use lots of technology such as logging computers,
>> radio control, CW keying, voicekeyers etc...I didn't rant about anything. I
>> was just stating the facts. BTW not wanting to embrace technology isn't
>> limited to only amateur radio. I have many older friends and family that
>> just like doing things the way they always have.JeffSent from my Verizon,
>> Samsung Galaxy smartphone
>>> -------- Original message --------From: rjairam at gmail.com Date:
>> 8/23/21  7:05 AM  (GMT-05:00) To: Jeff Clarke <ku8e at ku8e.com> Cc:
>> CQ-Contest Reflector <cq-contest at contesting.com> Subject: Re:
>> [CQ-Contest] Past Prediction of the Future of Contesting. Re-read what I
>> said. You read the first part then went off on a rantbased on that alone.I
>> did say you should have a choice. But "Please, no, a thousand timesNO!" by
>> Hans means that he doesn't want that piece of tech to exist.THAT is being
>> anti-technology.RiaN2RJOn Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 8:17 PM Jeff Clarke <
>> ku8e at ku8e.com> wrote:>> Ria,>> With all due respect just because some of
>> us of us don't want to use> certain technologies doesn't make us "anti
>> technology"? Do all of us> have to operate the same way using the same
>> technologies? Have you ever> thought that there are many contesters who
>> like to operate non-assisted> because it gives them more personal
>> satisfaction? Personally I get more> satisfaction finding my own contacts
>> and multipliers instead of> operating in a way that's like catching fish in
>> a barrel. I can> guarantee there are many contesters who have the same
>> feeling as I do. I> have no problem if people operate the way they want to.
>> (assisted or> non-assisted) Unfortunately the Single-Op rule changes in CQ
>> WPX has> taken away the option to choose the way you want to operate.
>> Pretty much> you have to operate assisted if you want to have a competitive
>> score.>> Jeff KU8E>>> On 8/22/2021 5:49 PM, rjairam at gmail.com wrote:> >
>> 97.1 Basis and purpose.> >> > ...> >> > (b) Continuation and extension of
>> the amateur's proven ability to> > contribute to the advancement of the
>> radio art.> >> > 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).> >> > You
>> don't have to use a voice skimmer, but someone will invent it. I> > hope
>> that contest rules at least adapt to it - keep the unassisted> > categories
>> (too late CQ WPX) without skimmer but allow it for assisted> > or
>> "unlimited" categories.> >> > We already have the existing cluster with all
>> of the "mechanical> > turks" putting in DX spots anyway.> >> > 73> > Ria,
>> N2RJ> >> > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 10:01 PM Hans Brakob <kzerohb at gmail.com>
>> wrote:> >> Please, no, a thousand times NO!> >>> >> 73, de Hans, KØHB> >>
>> “Just a Boy and his Radio”™> >> ________________________________> >> From:
>> CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+kzerohb=gmail.com at contesting.com> on
>> behalf of Richard F DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w at gmail.com>> >> Sent: Friday,
>> August 20, 2021 7:25:35 AM> >> To: Frank Donovan W3LPL (Frank Donovan
>> W3LPL) <donovanf at erols.com>> >> Cc: reflector cq-contest <
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com>> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Past Prediction
>> of the Future of Contesting.> >>> >> I guess the logical follow-up is
>> what's next:> >>> >> I vote for voice "skimmer"...> >>> >> 73 Rich NN3W>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 8:18 AM <donovanf at erols.com> wrote:> >>>
>>>>> Thanks for sharing this Pete.> >>>> >>>> >>> Many of the forecasts
>> proved to be accurate, but as often happens> >>> with forecasts , two of
>> the most revolutionary changes that have> >>> greatly impacted contesting
>> were totally unanticipated:> >>>> >>>> >>> - CW Skimmer and its associated
>> Reverse Beacon Network, and> >>> - Explosive growth in the use of digital
>> error correcting protocols,> >>> especially FT8> >>>> >>>> >>> "It’s tough
>> to make predictions, especially about the future" – Yogi Berra> >>>> >>>
>> 73> >>> Frank> >>> W3LPL> >>>> >>> ----- Original Message -----> >>>> >>>
>> From: "Pete Smith N4ZR" <pete.n4zr at gmail.com>> >>> To: "reflector
>> cq-contest" <CQ-Contest at Contesting.COM>> >>> Sent: Friday, August 20,
>> 2021 2:17:22 AM> >>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Past Prediction of the Future of
>> Contesting.> >>>> >>> In 2007, ES5TV compiled reflector users'
>> predictions/guesses/wild-ass> >>> guesses about what contesting would look
>> like ten years hence. It's now> >>> 4 years past his original time horizon,
>> and I thought people would find> >>> it interesting, so I've put it in my
>> Dropbox account at> >>>
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/uzpj6vhxuqtp6sf/10%20years%20later.pdf?dl=0>
>>>>> <https://www.dropbox.com/s/uzpj6vhxuqtp6sf/10%20years%20later.pdf?dl=0>.>
>>>>> Feel free to download the pdf and giggle...> >>>> >>> --> >>> 73, Pete
>> N4ZR> >>> Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network> >>> web server at <
>> http://beta.reversebeacon.net>.> >>> For spots, please use your favorite>
>>>>> "retail" DX cluster.> >>>> >>>
>> _______________________________________________> >>> 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_______________________________________________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
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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