[Skimmertalk] Skimmertalk Digest, Vol 5, Issue 7

[Pete Smith]

Can we please make Denny's the last word on this, and get skimmertalk back 
to nuts and bolts?

73, Pete N4ZR

At 01:21 PM 10/21/2008, Dennis OConnor wrote:
>Well Bill, that gets us back into the "is it assistance" conundrum again 
><sigh>
>
>I would consider anything that shows you the exact frequency of each 
>signal on the entire band to be a form of assistance..  The fact that it 
>is or is not decoding the calls is not relevant - because you can point 
>and shoot your way to each exact signal, covering the entire band in a 
>minute or two as opposed to tuning the radio, or a second radio, by ear 
>and figuring out where each station is....
>
>The introduction of this software and the Softrock radio has changed CW 
>contesting... It will not be the same... The presence of this tool will 
>force the contest sponsors over the next few years to alter their 
>rules...  My prediction is that in the end they will throw up their hands 
>and declare, just like having a second radio, having a skimmer is your 
>choice (because it cannot be monitored)...
>
>denny / k8do
>
>--- On Tue, 10/21/08, skimmertalk-request at contesting.com 
><skimmertalk-request at contesting.com> wrote:
>From: skimmertalk-request at contesting.com <skimmertalk-request at contesting.com>
>Subject: Skimmertalk Digest, Vol 5, Issue 7
>To: skimmertalk at contesting.com
>Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2008, 12:00 PM
>
>Send Skimmertalk mailing list submissions to
>         skimmertalk at contesting.com
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://dayton.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         skimmertalk-request at contesting.com
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>         skimmertalk-owner at contesting.com
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Skimmertalk digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Blind Skimmer Option for Unassisted Categories (Bill Tippett)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:13:01 -0400
>From: "Bill Tippett" <btippett at alum.mit.edu>
>Subject: [Skimmertalk] Blind Skimmer Option for Unassisted Categories
>To: skimmertalk at contesting.com
>Message-ID:
>         <296a468b0810210813q43830a85n69e163fcf24c8d76 at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>I've used Skimmer, PowerSDR and Winrad waterfalls for some time now.
>I very much prefer Skimmer's display and rig interface.  I find it
>very easy to click on the dots to send my K3 to exactly the right
>frequency (versus attempting to line up the crosshairs using PowerSDR)
>and then decode the signals by ear.
>
>I have no interest in using Skimmer's decoder since I normally operate
>in Unassisted categories, but I would really like an option to put
>Skimmer into a waterfall-only mode (i.e. no decoding).  This might
>also relieve some of the CPU burden when using less than a 2 GHz
>machine.
>
>I suspect others might be interested in the same option.  Alex, is
>there any chance you might consider such an option for those of us who
>love Skimmer's display and interface, but don't want to put ourselves
>into Assisted categories by using Skimmer as presently configured?  Do
>any others feel the same?
>
>73,  Bill  W4ZV
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Skimmertalk mailing list
>Skimmertalk at contesting.com
>http://dayton.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk
>
>
>End of Skimmertalk Digest, Vol 5, Issue 7
>*****************************************
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Skimmertalk mailing list
>Skimmertalk at contesting.com
>http://dayton.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk