[Skimmertalk] Archive?

[Dick Dievendorff]

Packet cluster is also a form of "remote receiver", and it is permitted for multi-op.  How is CWSkimmerCluster (in a spotting mode) not permitted to multi op?
 
Dick



> From: w4tv at subich.com> To: dieven at msn.com; skimmertalk at contesting.com> Subject: RE: [Skimmertalk] Archive?> Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 00:51:56 -0400> > > > Is the use of a offsite skimmer cluster which involves no > > humans, but does involve remote receiving equipment not > > "assistance" because there are no humans involved? It's not > > "multi-op" because there is only one human operator? > > An offsite skimmer is a "remote receiver" which is prohibited > to all classes (including multi-multi). > > 73, > > ... Joe, W4TV > > > > > > -----Original Message-----> > From: skimmertalk-bounces at contesting.com > > [mailto:skimmertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Dick > > Dievendorff> > Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 4:17 PM> > To: skimmertalk at contesting.com> > Subject: Re: [Skimmertalk] Archive?> > > > > > I'm troubled by the word "assistance".> > > > It has a common dictionary meaning which could be applied to > > any human or non-human helper including all the non-human SO > > tools (computers, SCP) we've used in the past.> > > > The contest organizers created SOA to mean "SO + spotting > > help using the efforts of other people". > > > > Some of us argue that since the SOA category contains the > > word "assistance" and SOA means "spotting assistance using > > the efforts of other people", therefore anything that is > > enabled by non-human local technology is not "assistance". > > > > Let's say, for the sake of argument that a local CWSkimmer is > > permitted for SO in some contest.> > > > Is the use of a offsite skimmer cluster which involves no > > humans, but does involve remote receiving equipment not > > "assistance" because there are no humans involved? It's not > > "multi-op" because there is only one human operator? > > > > So does assistance mean "other people"?> > > > I believe the contest organizers can arbitrarily, by fiat, > > and without apology define a new or modify an existing > > category in any way they wish. The organizers may be > > motivated by popular opinion, consistency, fairness, ability > > to verify that the rules are being followed, desire for fewer > > or more categories, convention from other contest organizers, > > a desire to change or preserve the status quo, or any number > > of pressures that I can only guess at.> > > > Once the contest organizers make their decisions, the > > contestants will vote with their feet. > > > > Dick, K6KR> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----> > From: skimmertalk-bounces at contesting.com> > [mailto:skimmertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of K0HB > > Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 12:32 PM> > To: W4TV Joe Subich; skimmertalk at contesting.com> > Subject: Re: [Skimmertalk] Archive?> > > > > > >> > > If I connect a CW decoder to each of those 17 receivers where> > > is the "assistance?" > > >> > > > The "assistance" is the CW decoder.> > > > I submit that there ought to be a "classic" category in CW > > contesting in> > which only a single human operator decodes the Morse signals, and> > consequently the most skilled operators in that category > > would have the> > best chances of winning. If they were skilled enough to > > simultaneously> > decode signals by ear from 17 receivers, then they should win over the> > operators whose skill was only sufficient to simultaneously > > decode signals> > from 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, or 16 > > receivers. > > Diana Moon Glompers would hate such a category!> > > > Such a category would exclude operating aids such as CW > > decoders, SCP, and> > similar means of determining the callsigns of others stations.> > > > 73, de Hans, K0HB> > Just a boy and his (17) radios> > --> > ><{{{{*> http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________> > Skimmertalk mailing list> > Skimmertalk at contesting.com> > http://dayton.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk> > > > _______________________________________________> > Skimmertalk mailing list> > Skimmertalk at contesting.com> > http://dayton.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk>