[UK-CONTEST] NFD rules

[Paul O'Kane]

On 14/06/2011 02:22, Andrew wrote:


> Not picking holes at all,

We can all read - you're picking holes.


> Who defines the agreed starting point?

There you go, picking holes again.


> Does the internet make the QSO for you too or did you use RF to make the
> contact?

That's like saying "Of course I sailed the full
distance all by myself, with hardly any help from
anyone else".  It's a foolish thing to do in a
competitive event, and you're kidding yourself.


 > If you make the QSO over amateur radio, then it's amateur
> radio, irrespective of how you found the station.

And if you clear a high-jump bar, using a trampoline
or a springboard or a pole, you're a high-jumper?


> you also complain about skimmer, even a local one that
 > doesn't use an internet connection at all.

Here is what I posted on 7th June

    There may be logic there, but only to those who
    think it's appropriate to use a multi-channel CW
    decoder, or any decoder, in a CW contest. That's
    a good way to reduce CW to the status of "just
    another data mode" (K1TTT - 22 March 2008)


> Why is it OK to have computer loggers and computer based CW
> sending but not computer based CW decoders?

Here is what Ward N0AX, author of the ARRL Contest
Update, says.

http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00472.html

   "Dealing with automated reception differently than
   automated transmission is appropriate because only
   reception can initiate a QSO; whether in response
   to a solicitation (CQ) or from tuning to a solicitation
   (S&P).  Reception is qualitatively different in this
   regard than transmission."

and

http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00481.html

   "You can cast the lure as much as you want, but if no
   fish bites, you have not caught a fish.  There must
   be a reception event to trigger the process by which
   a QSO is conducted.  Both reception and transmission
   are necessary, but neither is sufficient.  Transmission
   events soliciting QSOs typically outnumber reception
   events many-to-one. (Which key on your keyboard is the
   most worn - F1 or Insert?)  Thus, reception is the
   critical element in allowing the transaction to proceed."

Please address any comments directly to N0AX.


> Who, other than the contest organisers, has the right to say which
> technologies can be used in their contest?

We all have the right to say.  However, contest
organisers have the final say.


> If you don't like the rules,
> don't enter the contest.

I enjoy contests, even some with rules I don't like.


> ... I don't enter the Russian DX
> contest because I disagree with being penalised for the other guy making
> an error!

Good for you, but that's a separate issue.


Using the internet in an amateur radio contest is
about as sensible as using a pole in a high-jump
contest.  The internet makes even less sense,
if there can be less than none, in the context
of NFD.


73,
Paul EI5DI