If European VHF and UHF contests allow the scheduling of QSOs by other than
over-the-air means, then of course it's not cheating. However, it strikes
me as absurd to combine packet (one-way data, information only) and two-way
liaison via Internet under the same category.
73, Pete N4ZR
At 01:13 PM 1/30/2008, Uwe Granzow wrote:
>Hi out there,
>
>I'm just a bit shocked about the cheating discussion especially by using
>ON4KST-chat. I can hardly understand the discussion around the 160m-chat,
>but to discuss it also for the microwave-test is too heavy. On SHF in Europe
>this is the normal way to arrange QSOs, especially when your location is
>remote. About 60% of our contest QSOs on 23cmtrs and higher are arranged via
>PR or ON4KST-chat, but without cheating with reports and so on. Most of the
>SHF-contesters use the chat, so where's the problem?
>On SW (assisted) where's the problem using PR and/or the chat in contests?
>It's only a way to arrange QSOs, not to exchange reports. If you work SO
>assisted you need also time to handle PR and/or the chat, it looks like
>doing SO2R, you need quick fingers and you must handle the rig and the
>computer to arrange QSOs at once just like 2 radios. We're using PR mostly
>on 23cmtrs and up, it's very helpfull. Outside the contests it's also a good
>way to find new ones or just to say hello to fellows. So, it's something to
>help you with ham radio, to have more fun, not for cheating.
>
>73s Uwe DL3BQA/DM0Y/DF0TEC
>
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|