[RTTY] NAQP RTTY contest on Saturday February 23

[Robert Chudek - K0RC]

Yes, that's true about the change to N1MM Logger. This morning I 
submitted a change request for the NAQP modules to default to Single 
Operator. If "Assisted" is not available for selection, that might 
prompt some people to visit the NCJ website to read the rules.  :-)  
That was the catalyst for my 'semi-rant' about the wording in the rules.

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN

------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 2/20/2013 1:12 PM, ww3s at zoominternet.net wrote:
> N1MM software now defaults to ASSISTED in the contest setup dialog. I think the rationale was the old default was single op, and many casual contesters would use the cluster or telnet spotting, and not know to change the default....
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Robert Chudek - K0RC" <k0rc at citlink.net>
> To: rtty at contesting.com
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:33:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] NAQP RTTY contest on Saturday February 23
>
> Thanks Mike...
>
> My questions came up because in a private message exchange I learned
> that many logs submitted for NAQP come in with "Single Operator
> Assisted" as the entry classification. That is not a valid class for
> NAQP. So this piqued my curiosity to look at the rules to see how the
> classifications are defined.
>
> For the seasoned contester that grew up with the development of the
> network, they will know and understand the nuances of "spotting" in the
> context that you described... that is, being connected to the network
> and sending spots, but not receiving them. I wonder how many casual
> contesters know about this, or how to set it up? If "send only" spotting
> is acceptable for NAQP, it should be stated as such (IMO).
>
> The irony is the existing language negates this understanding in the
> second part. First, 5.a.i. states: "One person performs all
> transmitting, receiving, spotting and logging functions..."  Then 5.b.i
> states: "more than one person performs transmitting, receiving and
> logging functions, etc." Spotting isn't even mentioned in the
> Multi-Operator Two-Transmitter category. This leaves the reader to
> question whether two-way spotting is allowed or not?
>
> I realize it can be argued that anything not explicitly disallowed in
> the rules is allowed on the air. However, when I combine the issue of
> receiving "Single Op Assisted" logs with the indirect language I read in
> the rules, I think the rules should be more direct on this topic.
>
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On 2/20/2013 7:59 AM, Michael Haack wrote:
>> I may entirely have missed this one, but....
>>
>>   IMHO,  Rule A:1 would apply to "spotting" stations.
>> There is no reason not to spot the stations you are working and many
>> cluster nodes will invoke the "contest" capabilities of the system,
>> which allows you to Spot only, and not receive spots from the system.
>>
>> In doing so you would still adhere to rule A:2.
>>
>> 73, Mike WB9b
>>
>>
>>
>>   On 2013-02-20 1:18 AM, Robert Chudek - K0RC wrote:
>>> Hello Mark...
>>>
>>> Can you (or someone) please clarify the following Single Operator
>>> Entry Classification:
>>>
>>> "Entry Classification:
>>>
>>> a. Single Operator
>>>
>>> i. One person performs all transmitting, receiving, spotting and
>>> logging functions as well as equipment and antenna adjustments.
>>>
>>> ii. Access to spotting information obtained directly or indirectly
>>> from any source other than the station operator, such as from other
>>> stations or automated tools, is prohibited."
>>>
>>>
>>> My question is this: In subsection "i." why is the word "Spotting"
>>> included? In subsection "ii." spotting information is explicitly
>>> prohibited. This double-talk language leads to confusion.
>>>
>>> Next, in the Multi-Operator Two-Transmitter category, there is no
>>> mention about spotting. Does that mean an operator can use the
>>> network for spotting? If so, why not simply state it.
>>>
>>> Kudos! Rule number 7 is plain English. CW only, SSB only, RTTY only.
>>>
>>> Then in Rule 10, the "assistance" question is buried in the second
>>> half of the "Exchange" rule. In my mind, assistance and spotting go
>>> hand-in-hand. Why not add a plain English rule about spotting and
>>> assistance as a numbered item?
>>>
>>> My apology if I "sound cranky"... I guess I am!
>>>
>>> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty