This theoretical discussion repeats frequently and goes no where.
All of this is because of the error of trying to define "assistance".
Instead, focus on what it means to be a single operator. This is where one
person actively locates, decodes and identifies every callsign that ends
up in his log. No one else is involved in that activity. There is no
internet connection in that activity. There is no device that locates or
identifies potential callsigns in that activity. A non-assisted single
operator performs all activities that lead to a callsign ending up in his
contest log.
Anything outside of that simple Single Operator definition is either:
1) Assistance
or
2) Multi-operator.
In this case, the use of RBN would clearly be outside the definition of
single operator. #1 or #2? Subject to debate.
73,
Bob W5OV
P.S. This is my personal opinion and does not necessarily represent any
contest committee that I am a member of.
> Ok guys,
> First of all I want to remind you that my interest is purely theoretical.
> I
> am not going to use this technique when SO not assisted unless contest
> sponsors say "it is OK to use it". All I am trying to do is to find as
> close to perfect definition of "not assisted" as possible with your help.
> So far there are a lot of contradictions in most of the arguments. Until
> skimmers appeared assistance was interpreted as getting helping
> information from other human beings. It is not anymore. Still getting
> outside information is allowed in some cases (WWV, beacons) and not
> allowed
> in other cases. I am afraid the border line is quickly turning into 'grey
> zone".
>
> 73, Igor UA9CDC
>
> 2012/5/31 Dale Putnam <daleputnam@hotmail.com>
>
>>
>> And that... specifically is what makes it "assisted" Outside
>> information, not readily available without outside assistance.
>>
>> --... ...--
>> Dale - WC7S in Wy
>> In essence I would not get no outside help in locating,
>> > identifying and working stations in the contest. I just get accurate
>> and
>> up
>> > to date information about propagation which is basically more accurate
>> then
>> > what I might have got with the help of propagation prediction
>> software.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|