> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stan Stockton [mailto:k5go@cox.net]
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 02:15
> To: k1ttt@arrl.net; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer - Proposal & Compromise
>
>
> ---- David Robbins K1TTT <k1ttt@arrl.net> wrote:
> > > Those who run packet clusters would need to have "trusted sites" and
> make
> > > provisions so that Skimmer input was not accepted to avoid this.
> > >
> >
> > not going to happen... in fact, some nodes are now offering skimmer
> spots to
> > local users. It won't be long before we get the filters a bit better
> and
> > they will be loose in the world wide network and indistinguishable from
> > operator entered spots, there won't be any way for anyone to know if it
> was
> > skimmed or human entered.... this another push to kill the whole packet
> > network in disguise??
>
> David,
>
> Nothing disguised. I'm pretty straight forward. I did not know it was
> being incorporated into packet such that there was no distinction between
> the two.
>
> Is there some provision that would prevent the operator of a remote
> receiver/Skimmer in Europe from clicking on the option in Skimmer which
> would immediately fill the USA station's computer screen with all the
> callsigns copied on his run frequency (not just ones calling CQ)?
On the packet network the other sysops would instantly cut the node off as
the spots would be worthless and clog the network. The purpose of the
cluster network is to find stations that are cq'ing. A 'reverse beacon
network' that listed all the stations it could hear would be good only for
propagation studies in my opinion, something I would like to see once we get
the bad spot rate down.
David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|