Hi Dennis...you better 'find' me this weekend...!!! :)
BUT...if you are S&P'ing then you wouldn't get 'spotted' anyway...
Of course there is more to flesh out before SELF SPOTTING becomes
incorporated...but I think we're (thanks to Tree) onto something here... :)
MD
---- Dennis McAlpine <dbmcalpine@earthlink.net> wrote:
> But, what if one is an S&Per and changes frequency a lot? Then an update
> every 30 min is not enough. If you are looking for that rare SC mult in SS
> and you see me spotted 28 minutes ago, the chances are good that I am no
> longer on that frequency. This means that rare SC mult may continue to
> elude you.
>
> I make it a practice that if I come across a station calling CQ and it is
> not on my band map, I spot him so that everyone will know where that station
> is. That is a simple Alt-P on n1mm.
>
> The other option is to incorporate a built is skimmer into every radio and
> then you don't need to worry about spots that you can't hear. Three cheers
> for skimmer!!!
>
> 73,
> Dennis, K2SX
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w1md@cfl.rr.com [mailto:w1md@cfl.rr.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 9:53 AM
> To: k1ep.list@gmail.com; Glenn Wyant; CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Ban all contest spotting?
>
> So...maybe this is a "good" argument for allowing self-spotting. Say, allow
> each contestant in the contest the option to post their call/freq. every
> 30min's . (no more reports of the 'most spotted calls'...since everyone who
> is ON the network should have roughly the same number of spots over the
> weekend...96...no more cheerleaders or self spotters...WE'd ALL be self
> spotters)
>
> The good:
>
> 1. Ensures that the packet spot is correct...no busted calls
> 2. GREATLY reduces network traffic (It amazes me sometimes to watch the raw
> data feeds and see the multiple simultaneous spots of a station that go
> through).
> 3. Puts EVERYONE on the same playing field.
> 4. With periodic spots, the packet pileups would fade away.
> 5. No more having to hit ALT-F3 or whatever your logging program requires.
> 6. Have the logging software implement the periodic updates automatically
> and NOT allow any manual spots.
>
>
> Seems like a 'win win'. :)
>
> Marty
> W1MD
> ---- Ed K1EP <k1ep.list@gmail.com> wrote:
> > At 11/2/2009 02:11 PM, Glenn Wyant wrote:
> >
> > >Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Ban all contest spotting?
> > >
> > > >I propose that those who dont want clusters; that they dont use them.
> > > >
> > > > I propose that those who like using clusters ; use them.
> > > >
> > > > Assuming they claim the proper category , IF they submit a contest
> entry.
> > > >
> > > > I am one of those low-life , cripples that uses the cluster (
> assisted )
> > > > now and then , sorry to those who wish control my operating
> preferences.
> > > >
> > > > Glenn VA3DX
> >
> > For me, as a low power non-assisted contester, the use of packet in a
> > contest is not merely an argument of whether it is a crutch or not,
> > it affects the way I contest, even though I do not use it. Packet in
> > a contest creates "packet pileups". Once a sought after station is
> > spotted, a tremendous, sometimes unruly, pileup ensues. As an
> > unassisted low power contester, I seek out the DX by tuning. When I
> > find one, I would like the opportunity to work him without hundreds
> > of packet people descending upon him. If, on the other hand, I am
> > running and spotted incorrectly, I will all of a sudden have a flood
> > of eager contesters calling me. Many will have already worked me and
> > be dupes. This causes me to either QSY or work many dupes and reduce
> > my effective rate. So, the use of packet it not an isolated event,
> > it just doesn't help or assist the operator using it, it affects all
> > the other contesters. Whether these effects are beneficial or not
> > should be the discussion. If packet could be used by an assisted
> > operator without affecting others, then I am all for it. In reality,
> > that isn't the case.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|