The "no code reader" rule bugs me a little bit.
It seems a departure from the "no outside source of Call/QRG" paradigm which
previously was the generally accepted definition of assistance.
Perhaps the sponsor could share their rationale for this restriction. As a
long time CW guy with failing ears...... Well, let's just say that it's a
growing crowd.
__73, de Hans, K0HB
"Just a Boy and His Radio"™
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:37 PM, w2up@comcast.net <w2up@comcast.net> wrote:
> Yes, automation is on the way. Last month I drove from Denver to Vegas
> and back with no foot on the pedal and no hands on the steering wheel for
> 1400 of the 1700 mile trip. Compared to that, automated contesting is easy!
> Barry W2UP
> Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Smartphone
> ------ Original message------From: Stan StocktonDate: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 8:35
> AMTo: john@kk9a.com;Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com;Subject:Re: [CQ-Contest] Is
> it time that the contest sponsors officially identify SCP as "assisted?"
> Making code readers cause you to be in assisted category is a stop measure to
> total automation. After lunch the other day, my bother who is not a ham and
> who heard nothing but talk of all this for an hour during lunch, told me that
> it seemed a very small step to go from what is being done by a human to total
> automation.73...Stan, K5GO/ZF2ET> On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:00 AM, "john@kk9a.com"
> wrote:> > Until recently I thought that assisted meant getting outside
> assistance to> find stations, typically multipliers. Skimmer made this more
> complicated> as it really is not anyone else helping you find stations. Then
> the> committee changed the rules to include code readers as assisted.
> Certainly> logging software and computer generated CW are also some type of>
> assistance or why would we use them. There would be no way to run on two>
> bands simultaneously using a keyer and pad of paper. Where does this end?> >
> John KK9A> > > To: cq-contest@contesting.com> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Is
> it time that the contest sponsors officially> identify SCP as "assisted?">
> From: kr2q@optimum.net> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 23:26:40 +0000 (GMT)>
> List-post: mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>> Yes, the sponsors (or their
> committees) make the rules and the definitions.> > In CQWW and other
> contests, use of a database to alter calls is not> allowed...post contest.> >
> There can be zero doubt that using SCP is using a database assembled by>
> others.> Is there really a difference in changing a callsign during the
> contest via> use> of a db as> compared to changing it after the contest via a
> database? Think about it.> > Please focus on the "database" aspect rather
> than the timing aspect.> > If CQWW can recognize use of a CW decoder (any
> type, not just skimmer> type) as> assisted,> then why not recognize use of
> SCP as assisted?> > For me (IMHO), use of SCP is far more "assisted" than use
> of a cw decoder.> > If SCP partial is not helping you "copy" the callsign,
> then why use it? > Would> you be happy> to operate without it? If yes, then
> say so. If no, say so...and please> clarify why not.> > This is an old tune
> for me. See my NCJ article from May 1996, which covers> many topics,>
> including SCP. Don't have it available? Write me and I'll send you a copy.>
> > Some things never change....or can they?> > Usual disclaimer about my
> opinion versus my membership on the CQWWCC.> > de Doug KR2Q> >
> _______________________________________________> CQ-Contest mailing list>
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest_______________________________________________CQ-Contest
> mailing
> listCQ-Contest@contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|