[VHFcontesting] Why we participate [was: REMINDER:...CU2QSOPioneers]

[Tree]

> > True enough, but there does need to be some controls on this so that everyone
> > can have their fun (in a competition).
> 
> What aspect of CU2QSO would you "control"?

I am not trying to control an aspect of CU2QSO.  I am referring to rules
that limit what you can and can't do during a contest and still be called
a single-operator - unassisted.

Actually, maybe that's it..  the CU2QSO system is a spotting system where
the guy you are about to work is giving you assistance in spotting?  

> > I am not trying to say everyone needs to enter the same category, or that 
> > CU2QSO is the same as packet spotting... (but in some people's mind it 
> > comes too close).
> 
> This thread must break out of the connection that you keep making with
> associating CU2QSO with packet spotting.  After the ARRL Contest Desk actually
> took the time to review CU2QSO, it came out clean.  They had the same
> misconception about it at first (hence the "ban" just before the January VHF SS
> [great timing!]), but upon actually expending the effort to learn about the
> system, they understood that it is not related to any spotting activity and
> reversed themselves.

It still wasn't a case of happy adoption.  There is a side of this that 
is very concerning to many hams.  Sure, this doesn't cross the line when
it comes to the technical details...  but it is very close to the line
from a more emotional perspective.  That is why your ads for this on
the reflector continue to stir up the same debate.

> Please stop using the terms "packet spotting" and "CU2QSO" in the same argument,
> you are only confusing unrelated issues in the minds of other people who haven't
> taken the time to know what CU2QSO is and are simply making up their minds based
> on what they see coming from you on this thread.
> 
> At least visit the website (http://www.BEACONet.org) and view the simulation. 
> It explains everything.  Better yet...try it yourself.  It's quite an exciting
> technology...one that addresses many issues including: captive rovers (there
> aren't any when this system is used) and helping to make the most QSO's you can
> as a Rover (R to R QSO's being some of the most difficult to come by when out on
> the open road, far from home).

The truth is, if I tried it myself, I probably wouldn't gain anything 
because I don't think it is being used in my area.

However, I think that trying it wouldn't change my core beliefs about 
what contesting means to me - something I have been doing for about 
35 years.  I can quickly understand how this could work (from the 
excellent demo).  However, I just don't agree with what it is trying
to accomplish in the context of a single-operator-unassisted operation.

Tree N6TR
tree at kkn.net