CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer

To: <rt_clay@bellsouth.net>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on Skimmer
From: "Stan Stockton" <k5go@cox.net>
Reply-to: Stan Stockton <k5go@cox.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:29:09 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> There are no technology differences 
> between the single op unassisted and 
> single
> op assisted categories with one 
> exception: the delivery of callsigns 
> and
> frequencies from an outside source as 
> used in the assisted category. 
> Whether
^^^^^^^^^^^

Hold on there, it is relevant...a local 
skimmer isn't an outside source.

Tor
N4OGW

Tor:

The difference is only relevant if you 
judge it based on something someone 
wrote in an e-mail instead of what the 
rules actually say.  CQ Rules say:

"The use of DX alerting assistance of 
any kind places the station in the 
Single Operator Assisted category."


Does it say...Inside source or outside 
source or OF ANY KIND?  Does it say that 
assistance has to be human?  If we say 
that their must be a human assistant in 
order for it to count as assistance, I 
don't think we are evaluating the rule 
based on its intent.

The ARRL rules which are less clear say:

Multioperator and Single Operator 
Assisted stations may use spotting nets.



I don't see anything that says what a 
single operator can or cannot do.  It is 
generally accepted that a single 
operator cannot do what a multi-operator 
or Single Operator Assisted CAN do but 
it is not clear.


In my opinion, the rules were intended 
to differentiate between an operator who 
would tune his radio, find stations to 
work and work them versus those who 
would have someone else or something 
else do the work of finding the 
stations, and provide both callsigns and 
frequencies.  It won't go to the Supreme 
Court like a constitutional issue, but 
if it did I would put a lot of money on 
the outcome.

Some argue that Skimmer is not perfected 
and is in its primitive stage. 
Arguments that it is not really not that 
great because it frequently shows bogus 
callsigns, etc. are no justification for 
allowing it in the Single Operator 
(unassisted) category.  A time will come 
when it will bump callsigns against a 
master database and provide a list of 
callsigns that are close to 100% 
accurate and good.

Stan, K5GO 

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>