[VHFcontesting] REMINDER:CQWW VHF Contest and CU2QSO Pioneers

[Tree]

>  Yes, but what's to stop me from designing a CU2QSO version of the "TACO" 
> (Totally Automated Computer Operator) that someone used for HF CW 
> contesting, and having it complete the QSO.  That "TACO" design would be 
> easier then the CW version.
> 
> >I think the main reason that this doesn't feel right to many of us is that
> >it removes the operator from much of the QSO process and starts to feel too
> >much like packet.  Since packet spotting is an evil thing, then this starts
> >to feel like an evil thing as well.
> 
>  I agree it's TOO automated!  If you design a "TACO" program it's 
> COMPLETELY automated and that's CHEATING! How do you PROVE that?

This hasn't been addressed by contest rules yet.  I tried to force the 
discussion back in 1986 when I had the Z80 op make QSOs in the Field
Day without any human interaction.

Tree