[VHFcontesting] Re: Why we participate [was: REMINDER:...CU2Q SOPioneers]

[Hoffman, Mark]

I don't understand this. WHAT is so different here?

I hear someone CQing on 144.200 (national calling frequency),  with "CQ
contest, K2AXX FN12". Gee, I know his grid square. I know where to point. If
I leave my VFO on 144.200 the entire contest - will it remain silent? No. 

Using this argument, anyone using 50.125, 144.200, 222.100, 432.100 and up
as calling frequencies should be classed as SO-Assisted, as they are using a
"well-known network" since a calling frequency is the SAME THING as a net.
Everyone on the band tunes to 144.200 periodically. I mean EVERYONE. I've
heard my share of respondents to this thread there in the past, and I've
CQ'd there as well (with GOOD results, I might add). So I should petition
the ARRL to re-list me as SOHP-Assisted since I did that, right? Shame on
me.

How about WSJT QSOs? Gee, if I CQ on 144.140 or 50.270 - I'm SURE someone
else is listening there, since those are well-known network frequencies. If
I blasted 500w of WSJT out on 144.242 - doubtful I'd be found. 

With CU2QSO, you set up on a well-known network frequency, CQing manually
(just like WSJT), conversing through the keyboard (just like WSJT), passing
the SAME necessary contest traffic (just like WSJT). This uses a TNC,
instead of a soundcard/rig interface. 

Where IS the difference? ESPECIALLY between WSJT and CU2QSO? Both using
computers to generate the intelligence and detection. Both most commonly
found on spot frequencies for CQing. One enhancing the range of traditional
operations, one self-limiting by the nature of the mode. 

Where, then, is the problem with CU2QSO -  and the acceptance of WSJT? 

Enlighten me, please. 

-Mark, K2AXX


-----Original Message-----
From: jon jones [mailto:n0jk at hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 1:35 PM
To: vhfcontesting at contesting.com
Subject: [VHFcontesting] Re: Why we participate [was:
REMINDER:...CU2QSOPioneers]


>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?  - Tree

I agree with Tree on this one. Nothing against CU2QSO, but really - using it

is single op assisted. Fine to use it in contests, but in the correct 
category.  Not fair to those operating without such assistance.

- Jon NOJK

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting